[untitled]
222 comments
You are spot on.
As an Indian who's been working in IT for over a decade now, I concur. I am a software engineer and many people are surprised to see that I have not moved to a managerial role. Software Engineering is severely underrated and I have been on the receiving end of the dump work as you put it. It was frustrating to see the rampant nepotism and the rat-race to get to the US. I spent many a sleepless nights to gather the requirements from a US developer only to have the credit seized and see manager exploit us even more. With these new guidelines the so-called Onsite leads/managers are getting their comeuppance.
>>I am a software engineer and many people are surprised to see that I have not moved to a managerial role.
It is extremely wrong to say Managerial roles are there for the taking and good developers are not taking them.
If you are a good developer most managers are extremely hostile to you. Because they think if you become a manager you become a threat to their job. Therefore they prevent you from becoming a manager.
Its typical power play.
If you are really good and have real chops in you to do any big stuff, you are ruined in India. People will try to get rid of you anyway they can. The society as a whole hates merit people here. Because most are crooks and they don't like seeing real people getting rewards. That would disrupt their ecosystem.
If you are good, India is the last place you want to be. Move out, one way or other for your own good.
It is extremely wrong to say Managerial roles are there for the taking and good developers are not taking them.
If you are a good developer most managers are extremely hostile to you. Because they think if you become a manager you become a threat to their job. Therefore they prevent you from becoming a manager.
Its typical power play.
If you are really good and have real chops in you to do any big stuff, you are ruined in India. People will try to get rid of you anyway they can. The society as a whole hates merit people here. Because most are crooks and they don't like seeing real people getting rewards. That would disrupt their ecosystem.
If you are good, India is the last place you want to be. Move out, one way or other for your own good.
I couldn't agree more. I will not go as far as saying that India is the last place which values meritocracy, but it would be a wrong assessment that the general populace values meritocracy and hard work. The power structures in place give very little incentive to hard work and smarts. The managers, at least in IT services, are, to put it mildly, incompetent. The pay-offs of being a good developer are extremely small.
The crabs in a bucket mentality drags everyone down. The odds are totally stacked against a competent software engineer.
>>I will not go as far as saying that India is the last place which values meritocracy
The issue isn't just limited to software companies. You see in a country like India question papers leak, people cheat in exams. Teachers have their favorite pets at schools and colleges whom they reward with marks unfairly. What happens when a populace of this kids goes to do jobs? They bring the same culture everywhere. Which is why you will see every one wants to cheat at everything.
Everything from cheating at taxes(fake rent receipts), jumping traffic signals, promotions at office, voting for wrong interests, bribes, corruption etc etc. This permeates to every aspect of our nations very existing character.
People, society and governments have wrong priorities in India. Most think building roads or some fancy infrastructure will solve their issues.
In reality Human resources are what matters in building a country. The rest happens on auto pilot.
I won't say everything on west runs on Merit. But the situation is definitely better than India in my experience. Most importantly I have seen better the quality of human resources better a country turns out to be.
My guess is India will take a lot of time, several decades, may be even centuries to fix its core issues.
The issue isn't just limited to software companies. You see in a country like India question papers leak, people cheat in exams. Teachers have their favorite pets at schools and colleges whom they reward with marks unfairly. What happens when a populace of this kids goes to do jobs? They bring the same culture everywhere. Which is why you will see every one wants to cheat at everything.
Everything from cheating at taxes(fake rent receipts), jumping traffic signals, promotions at office, voting for wrong interests, bribes, corruption etc etc. This permeates to every aspect of our nations very existing character.
People, society and governments have wrong priorities in India. Most think building roads or some fancy infrastructure will solve their issues.
In reality Human resources are what matters in building a country. The rest happens on auto pilot.
I won't say everything on west runs on Merit. But the situation is definitely better than India in my experience. Most importantly I have seen better the quality of human resources better a country turns out to be.
My guess is India will take a lot of time, several decades, may be even centuries to fix its core issues.
I haven't spent a lot of time in India so I could be wrong but as an external observer: India's GDP per capita is still quite low.
A large part of the country is undeveloped. Fixing roads and infrastructure definitely helps but reducing population and creating better health should help as well.
India is a huge exporter of engineering talent. This is bad because it's a brain drain for the country. If I was getting SV level salaries, India would make sense.
A large part of the country is undeveloped. Fixing roads and infrastructure definitely helps but reducing population and creating better health should help as well.
India is a huge exporter of engineering talent. This is bad because it's a brain drain for the country. If I was getting SV level salaries, India would make sense.
Sorry to hear you were one of those receiving that dump work. I saw it happen to one of the most talented developers I've worked with at a prior gig a few years back. A few of us made a pact to never dump our work on "V___" and try to lighten his workload. Hopefully, this will improve people's situations.
>I spent many a sleepless nights to gather the requirements from a US developer only to have the credit seized and see manager exploit us even more.
Yes, I've seen them too, that's their typical attitude :) I still remember dejected co-worker (who resigned and took back his resignation because manager made false promise to retain him) said, "these guys shouldn't called managers, they are cheats,cheaters"
Yes, I've seen them too, that's their typical attitude :) I still remember dejected co-worker (who resigned and took back his resignation because manager made false promise to retain him) said, "these guys shouldn't called managers, they are cheats,cheaters"
Same here. I am unfit for pure managerial role. I need engineering. If there is people skills require to the Engineering end, I'll do it. But not full time.
> I've seen people, just after 2 years asked to give-up technical career...
I think this is largely a cultural thing - many Indians just don't see development itself as a career, everyone just wants to be a manager with people working below them. Sort of a 'face' thing. And of course when you have that attitude, you are generally not going to be excited or even really interested in development, which is perhaps one of the reasons why so many Indian developers are just not very good*
* Source: I've been team leader for an Indian dev team working out of Mumbai for several years. I am not saying India doesn't have good developers who care - it does, but they are extremely rare are companies like Capgemini and Cognizant, who simply don't pay enough to attract such people.
I think this is largely a cultural thing - many Indians just don't see development itself as a career, everyone just wants to be a manager with people working below them. Sort of a 'face' thing. And of course when you have that attitude, you are generally not going to be excited or even really interested in development, which is perhaps one of the reasons why so many Indian developers are just not very good*
* Source: I've been team leader for an Indian dev team working out of Mumbai for several years. I am not saying India doesn't have good developers who care - it does, but they are extremely rare are companies like Capgemini and Cognizant, who simply don't pay enough to attract such people.
There are plenty of good developers in India who only want to be developers. They never work for outsourcing companies. They only apply for product based companies they are interested in.
More generally, good developers don't work for outsourcing companies.
Yes, that's what I meant when I said they are rare are companies like Capgemini and Cognizant because of low salary
Its not just low pay. A friend of mine employed a developer who was a senior at WiPro earning over 1 lakh per month. He was employed for my friend at a junior developer salary simply because he was sick and tired of writing random throw away code. This developer finally wanted to gain some real skills, work on a real product, and took a huge pay cut to come to start working at a product based company. So far he is doing pretty good.
Largely because the management gravy train is yielding fewer returns year after year for a while.
There are people, especially who can't play the poisonous political game for too far that their mileage is limited to a point. These people have to retrain themselves with some hard hands on skills, or will suffer at the next purge.
There are people, especially who can't play the poisonous political game for too far that their mileage is limited to a point. These people have to retrain themselves with some hard hands on skills, or will suffer at the next purge.
Same thing in product companies too.
Read my other comments. Management fanciness is Indias national culture.
Read my other comments. Management fanciness is Indias national culture.
>I think this is largely a cultural thing - many Indians just don't see development itself as a career, everyone just wants to be a manager
I don't quite agree with cultural thing view. Honestly, 11 yrs back when I started with Cognizant, I was asked so many times by managers "how long you going to be technical? you can write programs now, do you want to continue that even after 5 yr or 10 yrs?"
Its not cultural thing, its being imposed by less talented management people, who see 'people/project management' is the only path for growth.
I don't quite agree with cultural thing view. Honestly, 11 yrs back when I started with Cognizant, I was asked so many times by managers "how long you going to be technical? you can write programs now, do you want to continue that even after 5 yr or 10 yrs?"
Its not cultural thing, its being imposed by less talented management people, who see 'people/project management' is the only path for growth.
Through working with teams in India, and spending a lot of time there over the years, I have several Indian friends working for Capgemini and Cognizant. The opinion I put forth (and it is just my opinion :) is based on what I've observed and also what friends and colleagues have told me.
Assuming these managers you mention were also Indian, couldn't their behaviour also be part of it being a 'cultural thing'?
Assuming these managers you mention were also Indian, couldn't their behaviour also be part of it being a 'cultural thing'?
When we mention 'cultural thing' it labels virtually everyone from India. There is vast difference between working in outsourced companies like CTS, Indian startups/ product-based companies.
true, these managers are Indians too :) They follow the rules set by their high management, it has to be company culture set by founders.
true, these managers are Indians too :) They follow the rules set by their high management, it has to be company culture set by founders.
At the end of my parent comment I did specifically say I wasn't referring to all Indians - you'd have to be an absolute cretin to label all developers from a population of 1.2 billion.
If you are not referring to all Indians, as you mentioned, where is this 'cultural thing' coming from? I'm quite confused about, what you exactly mean by saying 'cultural thing'?
Edit: you mentioned many Indian wants to be managers and dont see development as career choice, I disagree. I view the situation as, many Indians forced to follow companies culture set by founders. There is difference between the two.
Edit2: >My Indian friends who work or worked at such companies tell me this comes not just from management and the company itself, but also from a desire for the perception of prestige; to appear 'important' to their families in particular.
hmm, i think your Indian friend shared wrong info with you. Indian Families doesn't know difference between manager or tech-lead, technical architect. Most often middle class families doesn't care about the designation in IT but they do care about salary :)
Edit: you mentioned many Indian wants to be managers and dont see development as career choice, I disagree. I view the situation as, many Indians forced to follow companies culture set by founders. There is difference between the two.
Edit2: >My Indian friends who work or worked at such companies tell me this comes not just from management and the company itself, but also from a desire for the perception of prestige; to appear 'important' to their families in particular.
hmm, i think your Indian friend shared wrong info with you. Indian Families doesn't know difference between manager or tech-lead, technical architect. Most often middle class families doesn't care about the designation in IT but they do care about salary :)
My Indian friends who work or worked at such companies tell me this comes not just from management and the company itself, but also from a desire for the perception of prestige; to appear 'important' to their families in particular.
In a population of 1.2 billion, of course not everyone fully buys in to this. I've had the pleasure of working with some Indian devs who were interested and excited by development, and saw a good, non-administrative career ahead of them irregardless of what others thought of them. Of course I never have this pleasure for long - they always leave for product companies, and usually get 200% or more salary into the bargain!
In a population of 1.2 billion, of course not everyone fully buys in to this. I've had the pleasure of working with some Indian devs who were interested and excited by development, and saw a good, non-administrative career ahead of them irregardless of what others thought of them. Of course I never have this pleasure for long - they always leave for product companies, and usually get 200% or more salary into the bargain!
> hmm, i think your Indian friend shared wrong info with you. Indian Families doesn't know difference between manager or tech-lead, technical architect
No, but they know the difference between 'manager' and 'not a manager'. It's not just one friend, it's multiple people across Capgemini and Cognizant. You make a good point about salary being important, but it's far easier and more common to become a manager at Capgemini, Cognizant etc than it is to become a good developer anywhere.
No, but they know the difference between 'manager' and 'not a manager'. It's not just one friend, it's multiple people across Capgemini and Cognizant. You make a good point about salary being important, but it's far easier and more common to become a manager at Capgemini, Cognizant etc than it is to become a good developer anywhere.
What exactly groundbreaking stuff the product-based companies are doing in India? I know that some of them are good ore average. Rest of the people who work in these product based companies do similar work as these service companies except that they are highly paid and have much less politics.
>>Indians just don't see development itself as a career, everyone just wants to be a manager with people working below them.
Not new. This culture has existed since forever.
You will see in India there is wild craze for MBA degrees. Everyone wants an MBA. Like every single person. I even know house wife's who do MBA's because 'Just in case'.
Even before that, non impactful, unreal and very little value adding desk jobs have always been valued heavily in Indian culture.
To give you an example IAS. People know the job involves forwarding a few memos, approving leaves and vacation requests and supervising a few juniors. You get luxury free accommodation, handful pay and other myriad benefits.
Even in the private world its the same.
It all comes down to a simple thing: "In management, you get a lot of big stuff for free, which others don't get even after work".
Not new. This culture has existed since forever.
You will see in India there is wild craze for MBA degrees. Everyone wants an MBA. Like every single person. I even know house wife's who do MBA's because 'Just in case'.
Even before that, non impactful, unreal and very little value adding desk jobs have always been valued heavily in Indian culture.
To give you an example IAS. People know the job involves forwarding a few memos, approving leaves and vacation requests and supervising a few juniors. You get luxury free accommodation, handful pay and other myriad benefits.
Even in the private world its the same.
It all comes down to a simple thing: "In management, you get a lot of big stuff for free, which others don't get even after work".
I've got an office in Bangalore. I have not interviewed a single person from the big outsourcing agencies who had real talent. Bangalore is packed with talent but they all cost at least 3* more what the outsourcing agencies are paying.
I've seen both ends here in the US. I've worked with some of these big consulting agencies and those guys are almost always completely incompetent, whether they're H1B's or not. Half the code is either obviously recycled from another poorly done project or blatantly pasted from stackoverflow. A large number of the projects I saw never met expectations and we're quietly buried.
On the other side, I've known a lot of Indian developers at product companies here in the US and they're mostly brilliant. I'm sure it's self selected to a degree because you've gotta be pretty smart to get a job on the other side of the world. Still, I think taking down these big visa abusing companies is good for the US and India. The good engineers in both countries will get the pay they deserve, and Indian developers will get a better shot at working at companies that aren't just body shops
On the other side, I've known a lot of Indian developers at product companies here in the US and they're mostly brilliant. I'm sure it's self selected to a degree because you've gotta be pretty smart to get a job on the other side of the world. Still, I think taking down these big visa abusing companies is good for the US and India. The good engineers in both countries will get the pay they deserve, and Indian developers will get a better shot at working at companies that aren't just body shops
How the hell does management get work done then? They fired all their devs to bring over these people, then if what you paint is true nothing ever gets done. Is the goal to keep the old stuff running (by not touching it) at a lower price? I cannot understand how that is a reasonable option for a company.
It's like saving money by not changing your oil. They don't know what the hell oil does, just that it costs money every 3000 miles. They tried not changing it one time and nothing happened, so it must be an unnecessary expense.
Like not changing your oil, it's not something you can recover from.
Like not changing your oil, it's not something you can recover from.
India has a lot of good talent too. Most are desperate for jobs and will take anything offered(Just for the opportunity).
These sheep are work horses for the political cartels, and these people do bulk of the heavy lifting as the plum money, opportunities and rewards are eaten office politicians and their minions.
Most of this kind of talent is used and thrown like tissues or they grow a brain and move to different companies.
These sheep are work horses for the political cartels, and these people do bulk of the heavy lifting as the plum money, opportunities and rewards are eaten office politicians and their minions.
Most of this kind of talent is used and thrown like tissues or they grow a brain and move to different companies.
I'm Indian, and I don't know what you are talking about. I wasn't aware that there was a big group of devs working for politicians.
i have worked with one of them and after working for 2 years learnt that they gain the most by not allowing the employee to learn or be good at it. That way a maintain a low attrition even with paying half of what other good companies pay. the overall environment is obnoxious
As long as the outsourcing companies bill by the hour, they have all the incentive to minimise wages, and maximise billable hours.
It's silly, of course, It assumes that you are building a relationship for one project rather than a series of projects. A good team means that the organization will lean on them more, not less.
They are up to shenanigans to make sure they own the market. IBM for example is trying to hire up all available cheap talent in India so their competitors can't hire enough people to fill their contracts.
If your comment is related to H1B, I think you may be confusing this visa type with an O1. To apply for an H1B, you don't need to be highly skilled or have expert skills.
For the H1B, you only need to be applying to work in a "specialty occupation" and earn more than the prevailing wage for that occupation in the US.
From the USCIS website, "Generally speaking, a job is a specialty occupation if the occupation normally requires a bachelors degree in a related field of study. Jobs in fields such as engineering, math, and business, as well as many technology fields often qualify as a specialty occupation."
https://www.uscis.gov/eir/visa-guide/h-1b-specialty-occupati...
For the H1B, you only need to be applying to work in a "specialty occupation" and earn more than the prevailing wage for that occupation in the US.
From the USCIS website, "Generally speaking, a job is a specialty occupation if the occupation normally requires a bachelors degree in a related field of study. Jobs in fields such as engineering, math, and business, as well as many technology fields often qualify as a specialty occupation."
https://www.uscis.gov/eir/visa-guide/h-1b-specialty-occupati...
While O1 is more explicitly geared towards highly skilled, a lot of professors and researchers (and certainly most of the great engineers employed by FB, Google, etc.), from both India and elsewhere, actually come over on the H1B as the paper work is far more complicated for the O1.
Still doesn't change the fact that H1B is not the visa for exceptional talent. Its simple a visa meant to hire people in occupations where there is deemed to be a shortage of workers, from what I read.
Sure. My point is that I and others (and it seems Trump as well) want to see a system that is geared towards sth more merit based and towards exceptional talent. Any time people try and make a pitch about how legal immigrants are good for the country, most of the time they bring up people who would have qualified under a merit based system. So if a policy is being sold on the basis of X benefit to the American people, shouldn't the policy be geared towards actually bringing that benefit rather than fulfilling some other purpose?
I have a different take on this, as an American by birth: at least there is some recognition that engineering roles are second-class roles. Americans, and particularly bubble-dwellers in this industry, have this incredibly naive view that individual contributors are social equals with management (any tier).
Right. They are not equal just greater.
Agreed. This reflects the worst on the actually skilled Indians who get lumped in with the rest.
second you. The filthy crappy managers of this cartel would get some sense and not treat the self-respecting individuals contribution as waste
My experience is the opposite. The really good ones in the team will threaten to leave if they don't get onsite (US opportunity). Manager will tell them wait for a few months. After a few months of waiting, they will start bugging the manager regularly. Finally, they will agree to apply for his visa. It's currently happening to a guy in my team. He has been told to wait for more than two years now.
Having worked for for TCS and CTS, I second this
"I've said this before, Most Indians coming from TCS,Infy,CTS are not _highly_ skilled people. 80 to 90% of them are don't have expert skills. These people are close to management and play politics well, thats how they reach USA."
You haven't met everyone of them to apply such a broad characterization. You have a point to make - that these three businesses abuse the Visa - but that gets lost in your attempt to pass judgment on a group of people you haven't met, and yet feel at home grouping them together as "shoe-lickers". Get off your high horse.
You haven't met everyone of them to apply such a broad characterization. You have a point to make - that these three businesses abuse the Visa - but that gets lost in your attempt to pass judgment on a group of people you haven't met, and yet feel at home grouping them together as "shoe-lickers". Get off your high horse.
I think you may be new to HN. As someone who has spent 4+ years in Reddit, I have seen far worse comments about Indians. Compared to that, the comments here are bit more civil. I am happy more and more Indians are seeing what westerners think about them.
As an Indian I feel bad. But part of me knows this is true to large extent. Managers have too much power.
I am not new here. And the tech-migration is a relatively new thing in the Western world. I would wait a generation for that thinking to evolve.
Feel free to cross-check with outsourced Indian IT employees or at-least get familiar with social sites like quora where you can find large of Indians and their views outsourced world. HTH
Get back to me once you have cross checked with everyone you painted with the same broad brush.
On the other hand, Your ill-informed view paints a poor picture of you. As I said before - stop thinking you are better. Instead, you came across as a massive douche.
On the other hand, Your ill-informed view paints a poor picture of you. As I said before - stop thinking you are better. Instead, you came across as a massive douche.
You and Op are both right.
Yes not all people are bad. But Most are. Buy this is in every single company. Not just outsourcing firms.
The issue in India is scarcity. Which is every one wants their pound of flesh even if that comes from their own brother. They want it.
The Op is right though. You can't get anything through work in most Indian companies. Regional politics, linguistic politics, connections in high places, politics is what you need to progress in India.
In India work doesn't get you too far. Society doesn't reward work or merit. In fact rewards corrupt practices both in government and private sectors.
Yet people in India wonder why no good things happen here.
Yes not all people are bad. But Most are. Buy this is in every single company. Not just outsourcing firms.
The issue in India is scarcity. Which is every one wants their pound of flesh even if that comes from their own brother. They want it.
The Op is right though. You can't get anything through work in most Indian companies. Regional politics, linguistic politics, connections in high places, politics is what you need to progress in India.
In India work doesn't get you too far. Society doesn't reward work or merit. In fact rewards corrupt practices both in government and private sectors.
Yet people in India wonder why no good things happen here.
[deleted]
I'm an H-1B who would be thrilled to see these companies shut down. If they were removed, the competition for non fraudulent H-1Bs would dramatically reduce and the whole process would become much less painful. Fantastic if Trump actually acts on this.
Remember the interview where Trump said he ate fantastic chocolate cake and then launched cruise missiles toward Iraq (when in fact it was Syria)? Be careful what you wish for! You think he's going to kick out the Indian outsourcing companies, but it might be you who will be kicked out.
Given how awful wait times for green cards have gotten for Indians (even with a Masters from a top university (and sometimes even PhD...), if you apply now, you can expect to wait a couple of decades while for every other country but China you get it immediately), I think a lot of Indians are fine with gambling on drastic changes to be honest and seeing where the chips fall.
Not sure where you getting your information from - I've worked with ppl from the Middle East and Eastern Europe and it was taking them years to get their green cards. I know this guy from Lebanon who ended up moving to Canada to work for the same company he was working for in the US because he overstayed his h1b and was nowhere near getting a green card.
Not the parent, but he is right. If you are not from India or China, the GC takes about a year - once you find an employer who would apply for it. People who are from India or China wait for the same amount of time plus about a decade.
I often run into people who ask me about my immigration status and when I say that I am waiting for my GC to be done, they nod sympathetically, roll their eyes and tell about someone they know who "had to wait two years! Gosh!!". I tell them, with as much politeness I can muster, that I have been in the country for over 10 years, have filed for my GC 5 years ago,, and expect to wait another 5 to get it.
I often run into people who ask me about my immigration status and when I say that I am waiting for my GC to be done, they nod sympathetically, roll their eyes and tell about someone they know who "had to wait two years! Gosh!!". I tell them, with as much politeness I can muster, that I have been in the country for over 10 years, have filed for my GC 5 years ago,, and expect to wait another 5 to get it.
The waiting times for some countries suck but there's a reason for that.
If the US didn't have a considerable amount of immigrants from those countries then the times would be 8x less.
Same happens with Mexico. There are so many Mexican immigrants in the US already (legal and illegal) that getting a GC it's almost impossible now unless you have a legitimate marriage to a citizen.
If the US didn't have a considerable amount of immigrants from those countries then the times would be 8x less.
Same happens with Mexico. There are so many Mexican immigrants in the US already (legal and illegal) that getting a GC it's almost impossible now unless you have a legitimate marriage to a citizen.
> If the US didn't have a considerable amount of immigrants from those countries then the times would be 8x less.
No, past levels of immigration has no bearing on the backlogs. For example Germany, Ireland, Italy etc have no skilled immigration backlogs.
No, past levels of immigration has no bearing on the backlogs. For example Germany, Ireland, Italy etc have no skilled immigration backlogs.
Given the slow rate at which cutoff dates move, I fully expect it to take 20 years before the EB2 (essentially masters for those unfamiliar with the system) queue catches up to the present.
Colleague from Latvia got it in under a year, he said Germans would have a similar time frame. Russians as well I think
Anybody applying to become an employment-based immigrant other than those born in India, China, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico or Philippines will get theirs processed in about a year. For specifics, see the table titled "Employment based" in the latest visa bulletin at https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bul...
Masters and PhD matters for the green card process. I don't think the institution matters.
Maybe there ought to be another level for folks who have won awards from recognized societies and associations such as Nobel, ACM, what not
Maybe there ought to be another level for folks who have won awards from recognized societies and associations such as Nobel, ACM, what not
That is a non-immigrant work visa good for up to 3 years. It is not intended to be used by immigrants. It is not a permanent status like a green card.
I am an indian who had worked with one of them and i really hated it. The poorly paid employees are just kept waiting for an onsite opportunity to US or europe. The leads and managers are a disaster. It is good that it is happening and will help the indians and not just the US citizens. Atleast with this a huge number of employees with will not be abused with the onsite dream.
A non-indian friend of mine worked for one of them out of college and didn't love it either. And it's not just the H1-B abuse, there's a class action suit for discrimination against the few Americans they actually hire. Filed back in 2015, I can't find any news on where it went.
Anyway, seems like a crappy place to work all around. Except for management, presumably.
Anyway, seems like a crappy place to work all around. Except for management, presumably.
These managers dont manage they plunder and abuse. Now i am in another software product company in India the leaders / managers dont act that way. They motivate and lead by example and not take advantage of young and motivated associates aspirations
A more general question to ask based on this is: is there something about Indian culture (or people who grow up in India / Indian culture), that make many of the managers complete jerks?
The same question could be asked about corruption in India. A lot of Indians just seem overly eager to screw each other over, and lord it over each other. You see this in Indian colleges, with the so-called phenomenon of "ragging", which is really just socially accepted mental/physical abuse.
I just feel Americans (while many are total assholes), that the majority are generally much nicer as a people, and they don't treat each other like complete crap. What's wrong with Indian culture? How does Indian society manage to cultivate so many terrible people? (serious question)
The same question could be asked about corruption in India. A lot of Indians just seem overly eager to screw each other over, and lord it over each other. You see this in Indian colleges, with the so-called phenomenon of "ragging", which is really just socially accepted mental/physical abuse.
I just feel Americans (while many are total assholes), that the majority are generally much nicer as a people, and they don't treat each other like complete crap. What's wrong with Indian culture? How does Indian society manage to cultivate so many terrible people? (serious question)
I was born in India, lived there until I was 27, and then lived in US for 10 years. These are my observations, written in a hurry without much careful thought.
The petty corruption in the small scale is pervasive in India. I find that not the case in US. Most people one interacts with in US are honest (except car salesmen :). But at the higher echelons of society, the corruption is at a much larger scale in US.
I compare this with driving in both countries. In India the number of accidents are much higher, but the fatality per accident is much lower. In US, accidents are rare, but when it happens, the likelihood of someone getting killed is high. I think this is because drivers in India each try to squeeze out small advantages, and as a whole the traffic never gets to gain much speed, so when the inevitable accident happens, it is often not fatal. But in US, far more people follow the rules, everyone moves faster on an average, but the one careless driver in the group can cause much more damage.
I think of corrupt behavior the same way - the average Joe is not corrupt in US, so the society as a whole makes much better progress. But that leaves the system vulnerable to the action of one sociopath, so at the high end you see much bigger scandals.
The petty corruption in the small scale is pervasive in India. I find that not the case in US. Most people one interacts with in US are honest (except car salesmen :). But at the higher echelons of society, the corruption is at a much larger scale in US.
I compare this with driving in both countries. In India the number of accidents are much higher, but the fatality per accident is much lower. In US, accidents are rare, but when it happens, the likelihood of someone getting killed is high. I think this is because drivers in India each try to squeeze out small advantages, and as a whole the traffic never gets to gain much speed, so when the inevitable accident happens, it is often not fatal. But in US, far more people follow the rules, everyone moves faster on an average, but the one careless driver in the group can cause much more damage.
I think of corrupt behavior the same way - the average Joe is not corrupt in US, so the society as a whole makes much better progress. But that leaves the system vulnerable to the action of one sociopath, so at the high end you see much bigger scandals.
As an Indian, my long analysis says the society experiences serious levels of scarcity.
Therefore there is a perennial drive to gather for yourself whatever you get, while you have the chance.
Therefore there is a perennial drive to gather for yourself whatever you get, while you have the chance.
I think there are strict laws against ragging in India and it's definitely not socially accepted at all. Where are you getting your information from?
as an Indian, on some level, i agree with you. there is something seriously wrong. over population, less living space, compromises, orthodox social structure, such a low income per person can be some reasons of such jerk behavior.
I've heard people from both India and China use high population and living space as a crutch and an excuse for the various problems of their countries. But the fact is, it doesn't hold any water.
Japan has a very high population density + high forest/natural cover, meaning people are squeezed into very tiny living space, yet the (generally) respectful and selfless way in which they treat each other (in general) is something most other counties learn from.
Similarly, Germany has 80+ million people living in a tiny parcel of land, but they're doing fine, and they've kept their country a beautiful and great place to live.
Just the condition of the streets in major cities in India tell a lot--strewn with garbage and resume. Yoy walk over empty McDonald's fries holders and cups, when you walk the streets of some cities. In some cities, you have a semi-open sewer system that runs by the road, creating a foul smell on evey street, and helping breed mosquitoes.
The almost repulsing and disgusting state of place places, the streets, and cities in general--tell a lot about the apathy of the people of the things that are outside their home.
Japan has a very high population density + high forest/natural cover, meaning people are squeezed into very tiny living space, yet the (generally) respectful and selfless way in which they treat each other (in general) is something most other counties learn from.
Similarly, Germany has 80+ million people living in a tiny parcel of land, but they're doing fine, and they've kept their country a beautiful and great place to live.
Just the condition of the streets in major cities in India tell a lot--strewn with garbage and resume. Yoy walk over empty McDonald's fries holders and cups, when you walk the streets of some cities. In some cities, you have a semi-open sewer system that runs by the road, creating a foul smell on evey street, and helping breed mosquitoes.
The almost repulsing and disgusting state of place places, the streets, and cities in general--tell a lot about the apathy of the people of the things that are outside their home.
>>It is good that it is happening and will help the indians
These sort of things make it harder for the deserving employees.
People who already H1's are now treated as kings to which every single person in offshore centers are supposed to bow and do whatever asked for.
The new people who get H1's will now be people in the inner most circles of the cartels.
These sort of things make it harder for the deserving employees.
People who already H1's are now treated as kings to which every single person in offshore centers are supposed to bow and do whatever asked for.
The new people who get H1's will now be people in the inner most circles of the cartels.
I am currently recruiting engineers for my startup in India. The vast majority (>99%) of the candidates who have worked at TCS, Infosys, Cognizant etc. do not have any skill set whatsoever. They cannot solve engineering problems beyond the very basics and write shitty unmaintainable code. At this point I am forced to apply a more stringent red flag check if a candidate is coming out of that company. 10 years of "experience" in these companies = 1 year of experience * 10 years.
These companies do actually abuse the program and the legit people who are highly skilled suffer because of the lottery system - including highly skilled Indians who do NOT work at these companies but are working in small startups who cannot afford to put in multiple applications to win the lottery by statistics (instead of skill).
If this "flooding" is stopped then a lot of SV startups will have an easier time recruiting great talent from India.
I am skeptical though of the fact that whatever is replacing this system will not be circumvented soon in some other way.
These companies do actually abuse the program and the legit people who are highly skilled suffer because of the lottery system - including highly skilled Indians who do NOT work at these companies but are working in small startups who cannot afford to put in multiple applications to win the lottery by statistics (instead of skill).
If this "flooding" is stopped then a lot of SV startups will have an easier time recruiting great talent from India.
I am skeptical though of the fact that whatever is replacing this system will not be circumvented soon in some other way.
Regardless of locale, it's always tough to find the "thinking" candidate that can execute and collaborate.
I've got an office in Bangalore. The only thing I have found such candidates good for are non-development roles. e.g. documentation, transcribing.
If Trump manages to stop this wage dumping he will have at least achieved something which very much benefits the American economy. I don't know why previous administrations showed no interest in this - did they not understand what was happening or were their capitalist values comfortable in allowing it ?
>> which very much benefits the American economy
I think the overall effect is going to be a little different than what you imagine. Unless you are imagining a future where people who think a programmer is an "anomalously high-cost peon who types some mumbo-jumbo into some other mumbo-jumbo" [1] suddenly realize they are wrong and develop a profound appreciation of their services.
This is going to play out not too different from what happens when the minimum wage is raised, except at a higher level.
Average person expects: everyone will get paid more. Actual effect: less employment overall in the economy.
Average person expects: companies will be forced to hire local. Actual effect: a more active search for SaaS which doesn't have insurance overheads and doesn't complain to your HR department, and certainly won't threaten to complain to the great Donald when its services are terminated.
Average person expects: much better treatment of programmers by non-programmers. Actual effect: Ah ha ha ha...
Average person expects: much fairer and more equitable distribution of wealth. Actual effect: Because of the reasons mentioned above, even greater distortions, resentment against the ones who have the best paying jobs, the creation of "inside vs outside" class systems, government intervention to "fix" this problem which will make things worse.
Be careful what you wish for...
[1] http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-pro...
I think the overall effect is going to be a little different than what you imagine. Unless you are imagining a future where people who think a programmer is an "anomalously high-cost peon who types some mumbo-jumbo into some other mumbo-jumbo" [1] suddenly realize they are wrong and develop a profound appreciation of their services.
This is going to play out not too different from what happens when the minimum wage is raised, except at a higher level.
Average person expects: everyone will get paid more. Actual effect: less employment overall in the economy.
Average person expects: companies will be forced to hire local. Actual effect: a more active search for SaaS which doesn't have insurance overheads and doesn't complain to your HR department, and certainly won't threaten to complain to the great Donald when its services are terminated.
Average person expects: much better treatment of programmers by non-programmers. Actual effect: Ah ha ha ha...
Average person expects: much fairer and more equitable distribution of wealth. Actual effect: Because of the reasons mentioned above, even greater distortions, resentment against the ones who have the best paying jobs, the creation of "inside vs outside" class systems, government intervention to "fix" this problem which will make things worse.
Be careful what you wish for...
[1] http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-pro...
Programming has not really progressed as a science since the 90's. There are 3 items that are keeping the entire IT Market and technology in general from progressing.
1: Overtime exemptions. Management has zero incentive to hire experts and drive labor costs out of projects, which in turn hides those labor costs. You get lots of unpaid OT and tremendous immeasurable technical debt that managers spit-shine and pass onto the next investor or manager.
2: IT employee's can't work freelance due to IRS Tax rules that they are an employee and not a contractor which creates both criminal and civil liabilities for managers. Remember the programmer who crashed his Cessna into an IRS Building? This was why.
3: Anti-Labor market policies. H1B's, allowing silicon valley corps to enter into agreements not to poach each others employee's, and so forth.
Today, the IT market is 10% actual people who can program, architect, manage and in hack in general, 20% maintainers who spit shine the solutions and keep them running, and the remainder are empty bodies in a position who know almost nothing or just barely enough to do their jobs but if you throw anything outside of that very narrow expertise at them they disintegrate. The entire market, from education bodies straight up to the c-level execs and investors, encourage this as high-tech is the new whip used on the working man to run bubble after bubble and make money.
In that environment, the real hackers make decent money but have to be careful to continue progressing their craft. Everyone else has to fuck or be fucked.
1: Overtime exemptions. Management has zero incentive to hire experts and drive labor costs out of projects, which in turn hides those labor costs. You get lots of unpaid OT and tremendous immeasurable technical debt that managers spit-shine and pass onto the next investor or manager.
2: IT employee's can't work freelance due to IRS Tax rules that they are an employee and not a contractor which creates both criminal and civil liabilities for managers. Remember the programmer who crashed his Cessna into an IRS Building? This was why.
3: Anti-Labor market policies. H1B's, allowing silicon valley corps to enter into agreements not to poach each others employee's, and so forth.
Today, the IT market is 10% actual people who can program, architect, manage and in hack in general, 20% maintainers who spit shine the solutions and keep them running, and the remainder are empty bodies in a position who know almost nothing or just barely enough to do their jobs but if you throw anything outside of that very narrow expertise at them they disintegrate. The entire market, from education bodies straight up to the c-level execs and investors, encourage this as high-tech is the new whip used on the working man to run bubble after bubble and make money.
In that environment, the real hackers make decent money but have to be careful to continue progressing their craft. Everyone else has to fuck or be fucked.
> IT employee's can't work freelance due to IRS Tax rules that they are an employee and not a contractor which creates both criminal and civil liabilities for managers.
Can you cite a source?
I have never heard anything about this. I have known many devs who take on freelance side projects, though obviously it depends on the particulars of their employment contract.
Can you cite a source?
I have never heard anything about this. I have known many devs who take on freelance side projects, though obviously it depends on the particulars of their employment contract.
I'm pretty skeptical about your claims. You start with dubious claims about minimum wage increases driving down employment which has never been proven (the contrary has been observed in natural experiments).
So, not very worried.
So, not very worried.
Honestly, all I expect if this type of h1b abuse is reduced is that the visa cap won't be 3x oversubscribed on the first day. The total cap is less than 100,000, so it's a very small part of the overall labor force and even a big change in h1b policies isn't going to have a major change on the rest of the market.
Yes, but H1B can stay 6 years, so it's not just 100K, it's 100K x 6, or 600K.
600k is still small compared to the total labor market of 100M+
There's only 6-7 million tech workers in the US, so that's around 10%.
Here's a link I found on STEM statistics:
http://dpeaflcio.org/programs-publications/issue-fact-sheets...
Here's a link I found on STEM statistics:
http://dpeaflcio.org/programs-publications/issue-fact-sheets...
I still think stopping Abuse is the right thing to do for all the talented Indians who get stuck on H1B forever.
Absolutely. It's the Tata's that ruin it for everyone. US agencies did a piss poor job of keeping them in check, or they were told to look the other way by Clinton/Bush/Obama. Either way, I think salaries will be going up for all tech people, H1B and domestic. Also, it should be a lot easier for new graduates to get their foot in the door. This is a long time coming.
This. It's easy to assume the tech employment environment will improve by holding all other variables constant, ex. the total number of jobs, but in reality the up-front cost offset by hiring cheap labor will continue to be offset via other means, ex. SaaS instead of employees.
Isn't that the goal of a business though, optimize profitability and reduce costs. If migration to an SaaS platform is cheaper and more efficient, then i'd be more concerned if a business didn't move to it. I'm seeing a lot of commentary that seems to imply a business has a responsibility to create jobs and i'm genuinely perplexed where it comes from.
So I largely agree with this analysis but what is missing is any proposed remedy.
Medicare for all certainly seems like one substantive way to address your comment. Can you do an "expectations vs reality" for that one?
Medicare for all certainly seems like one substantive way to address your comment. Can you do an "expectations vs reality" for that one?
Sending the work abroad is a better way to solve the problem -- that will attract more outrage, and more regulation.
The "right" people were benefiting from the previous state of affairs.
Unfortunately I think the phrase about USA political parties, "there are no longer ideologies, only interests" applies.
Unfortunately I think the phrase about USA political parties, "there are no longer ideologies, only interests" applies.
If by "right" you mean a wealthy, unified bloc of Democrats and Republicans, then yes.
I think Trump will also change the tune and allow these companies to continue abusing H1-B. The problem is that large corporations which use services from TCS, Infosys, WinPro, etc. will complain. Trump yells but money talks.
Pretty sure it's the latter. There is at least one video of president Obama dodging a direct question about it from the spouse of someone replaced by an H1b worker.
I don't know why previous administrations showed no interest in this - did they not understand what was happening or were their capitalist values comfortable in allowing it ?
I don't think it was capitalist values that led to wage dumping, but rather wilful ignorance. Until now, the consensus of the global elites was that open borders are good, and that those who called for controlling immigration were evil in some way. Although I am extremely disturbed by the rise of populist right-wing movements, I am also convinced they have tapped into popular resentment of open borders philosophies that transcends simplistic labelling.
Bernie Sanders is an obvious example of a politician from the Western Left who opposed open borders, but an even more interesting example is the "xenophobic" violence in South Africa.
In the 1990s, for various reasons, South Africa ended up with de facto open borders. People flowed in from the rest of Africa and the Indian subcontinent. The economic collapse of Zimbabwe led to an even bigger inflow of foreigners. Refugees from other African countries often made a bee-line for SA. Employers often hired easily-exploited foreigners in preference to locals, and foreign businessmen were able to out-compete locals by using family members as very low paid labour, and undercutting small businesses run by South Africans in the impoverished townships, and in small towns by doing things like living in their shops. This in a country with extremely high unemployment.
Things came to a head in early 2008 when the first round of "xenophobic violence" erupted, and, since then, there have been sporadic outbreaks. Although the violence is often horrific, and obviously worthy of condemnation, the South African elites have been unwilling to address its causes, instead using words like "xenophobia" and generally deploring those who oppose open borders. These same elites benefited from the cheap labour, and dont bear the costs of uncontrolled immigration.
Although the violence in South Africa, and the rise of racist and bigoted rhetoric in the West is deeply disturbing, and worthy of condemnation, it is wilful blindness to the underlying causes that has lead to such extreme outcomes.
I don't think it was capitalist values that led to wage dumping, but rather wilful ignorance. Until now, the consensus of the global elites was that open borders are good, and that those who called for controlling immigration were evil in some way. Although I am extremely disturbed by the rise of populist right-wing movements, I am also convinced they have tapped into popular resentment of open borders philosophies that transcends simplistic labelling.
Bernie Sanders is an obvious example of a politician from the Western Left who opposed open borders, but an even more interesting example is the "xenophobic" violence in South Africa.
In the 1990s, for various reasons, South Africa ended up with de facto open borders. People flowed in from the rest of Africa and the Indian subcontinent. The economic collapse of Zimbabwe led to an even bigger inflow of foreigners. Refugees from other African countries often made a bee-line for SA. Employers often hired easily-exploited foreigners in preference to locals, and foreign businessmen were able to out-compete locals by using family members as very low paid labour, and undercutting small businesses run by South Africans in the impoverished townships, and in small towns by doing things like living in their shops. This in a country with extremely high unemployment.
Things came to a head in early 2008 when the first round of "xenophobic violence" erupted, and, since then, there have been sporadic outbreaks. Although the violence is often horrific, and obviously worthy of condemnation, the South African elites have been unwilling to address its causes, instead using words like "xenophobia" and generally deploring those who oppose open borders. These same elites benefited from the cheap labour, and dont bear the costs of uncontrolled immigration.
Although the violence in South Africa, and the rise of racist and bigoted rhetoric in the West is deeply disturbing, and worthy of condemnation, it is wilful blindness to the underlying causes that has lead to such extreme outcomes.
Cancellation of TPP was a good move as well. It was a major campaign thing for Bernie supporters so was glad to see it happen.
>did they not understand what was happening or were their capitalist values comfortable in allowing it ?
The latter I imagine. The Democratic Party is a firmly neoliberal institution as it is, but they're especially wooed by anything associated with "tech." It's like dangling keys in front of a baby. If corporations claim that they're hiring the best/brightest talent that simply can't be found elsewhere, then who is a mere politician to question that?
The latter I imagine. The Democratic Party is a firmly neoliberal institution as it is, but they're especially wooed by anything associated with "tech." It's like dangling keys in front of a baby. If corporations claim that they're hiring the best/brightest talent that simply can't be found elsewhere, then who is a mere politician to question that?
Agreed. The talented engineers this will open the doors to will be impressive. Ironically though, this will mean more Indians in SV competing for American jobs.
In regards to why previous administrations made no motion on this - my guess is that it's state level politics. While prioritizing by yearly salary definitely makes sense, it means H1-B will be occupied by tech hubs with high cost of living: SF/NYC. I'd be interested to see the distribution between states of the $50k h1b jobs and how many are in states/districts which would benefit from the way it is now.
> very much benefits the American economy
This move seems consistent with Trump's and part of the GOP's nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-international trade ideology. He'll try to sell aspects of it in ways that appeal, but IMO it will have bad consequences for the U.S. and other economies:
First, demonizing foreign companies is a very dangerous trend to start. It's the same thought process as racial and religious prejudice - the outsiders are just one broad stereotype and threatening. Is it coincidence that he chose a country that is different and more foreign to most Americans - i.e., he didn't choose the UK or Australia, or even Germany.
Second, much of SV sells their products, including their technical services, outside the U.S.; if the U.S. becomes hostile to foreign goods and services, why will others continue to buying the same from American companies? If the U.S. abandons free trade in general, why will others pursue it? It also is a blow to global productivity; instead of large productivity benefits of economic specialization, with everyone using best-in-world products and services (again, many of which are American), we all become limited to best-in-our-country.
Third, India in particular is very important to the U.S., economically and strategically. Power comes from wealth and population; since WWII the U.S. has been by far the largest advanced economy in the world (Japan is second, ~40% as big), and thus the leading world power. China and India each have around 4 times the U.S. population and their economies are advancing quickly; if they advance far enough, the U.S. will be to them as the UK is to the U.S.; also the core of world economic activity will be Asia, where the people and wealth are. China is hostile to the U.S. in many ways; India at least is a (somewhat) pluralistic democracy which shares a British heritage with America. The U.S. may need India economically and strategically, and if Indians feel the U.S. is hostile to them as a nation or on a racial basis, it could cause significant damage.
This move seems consistent with Trump's and part of the GOP's nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-international trade ideology. He'll try to sell aspects of it in ways that appeal, but IMO it will have bad consequences for the U.S. and other economies:
First, demonizing foreign companies is a very dangerous trend to start. It's the same thought process as racial and religious prejudice - the outsiders are just one broad stereotype and threatening. Is it coincidence that he chose a country that is different and more foreign to most Americans - i.e., he didn't choose the UK or Australia, or even Germany.
Second, much of SV sells their products, including their technical services, outside the U.S.; if the U.S. becomes hostile to foreign goods and services, why will others continue to buying the same from American companies? If the U.S. abandons free trade in general, why will others pursue it? It also is a blow to global productivity; instead of large productivity benefits of economic specialization, with everyone using best-in-world products and services (again, many of which are American), we all become limited to best-in-our-country.
Third, India in particular is very important to the U.S., economically and strategically. Power comes from wealth and population; since WWII the U.S. has been by far the largest advanced economy in the world (Japan is second, ~40% as big), and thus the leading world power. China and India each have around 4 times the U.S. population and their economies are advancing quickly; if they advance far enough, the U.S. will be to them as the UK is to the U.S.; also the core of world economic activity will be Asia, where the people and wealth are. China is hostile to the U.S. in many ways; India at least is a (somewhat) pluralistic democracy which shares a British heritage with America. The U.S. may need India economically and strategically, and if Indians feel the U.S. is hostile to them as a nation or on a racial basis, it could cause significant damage.
> Is it coincidence that he chose a country that is different and more foreign to most Americans - i.e., he didn't choose the UK or Australia, or even Germany.
According to the article, the three named companies are the three top recipients of H1B visas. Australia, Germany, and the UK are not mentioned because Australian, German, and UK companies are not among the top H1B abusers. There's no conspiracy here. The over-representation of Indians as H1B programmers has been noted even as far back as the GAO report I posted elsewhere.
> China and India each have around 4 times the U.S. population and their economies are advancing quickly; if they advance far enough, the U.S. will be to them as the UK is to the U.S.; also the core of world economic activity will be Asia, where the people and wealth are.
And much of that economic advancement in China has happened with very protectionist policies, so your argument that the US must promote free trade at the expense of enforcing its own laws and protecting its labor-force in order to maintain its economic strength is a little strange.
> instead of large productivity benefits of economic specialization, with everyone using best-in-world products and services (again, many of which are American), we all become limited to best-in-our-country.
Protectionism rarely means the outright banning of imports, it usually just involves tariffs. And there are plenty of tariffs right now in the US and many other countries and the world isn't falling apart as we're forced to use subpar products. (If anything, the relaxation of trade barriers and lowering of tariffs has resulted in more junk.)
I have very little sympathy with the idea that we have to throw the American labor force under the bus because of nebulous concerns about the distant future. We have corporations exploiting the laws to suppress wages and lay off American workers in favor of H1Bs right now in the present, and we know what to do about it. We don't know how the future is going to play out. In the long run, we are all dead.
According to the article, the three named companies are the three top recipients of H1B visas. Australia, Germany, and the UK are not mentioned because Australian, German, and UK companies are not among the top H1B abusers. There's no conspiracy here. The over-representation of Indians as H1B programmers has been noted even as far back as the GAO report I posted elsewhere.
> China and India each have around 4 times the U.S. population and their economies are advancing quickly; if they advance far enough, the U.S. will be to them as the UK is to the U.S.; also the core of world economic activity will be Asia, where the people and wealth are.
And much of that economic advancement in China has happened with very protectionist policies, so your argument that the US must promote free trade at the expense of enforcing its own laws and protecting its labor-force in order to maintain its economic strength is a little strange.
> instead of large productivity benefits of economic specialization, with everyone using best-in-world products and services (again, many of which are American), we all become limited to best-in-our-country.
Protectionism rarely means the outright banning of imports, it usually just involves tariffs. And there are plenty of tariffs right now in the US and many other countries and the world isn't falling apart as we're forced to use subpar products. (If anything, the relaxation of trade barriers and lowering of tariffs has resulted in more junk.)
I have very little sympathy with the idea that we have to throw the American labor force under the bus because of nebulous concerns about the distant future. We have corporations exploiting the laws to suppress wages and lay off American workers in favor of H1Bs right now in the present, and we know what to do about it. We don't know how the future is going to play out. In the long run, we are all dead.
> We have corporations exploiting the laws to suppress wages and lay off American workers in favor of H1Bs right now in the present
I think American workers are very expensive indeed, even programmers here are largely over-compensated. That is why American companies are moving to other countries to save cost.
Protectionist policy can move some business back to America if other countries want to sell here. But as China soon amounts to the biggest market for many catalogs in the world, I don't think US have too much leverage on this one unless those global companies are willing to lose the Chinese market.
I think American workers are very expensive indeed, even programmers here are largely over-compensated. That is why American companies are moving to other countries to save cost.
Protectionist policy can move some business back to America if other countries want to sell here. But as China soon amounts to the biggest market for many catalogs in the world, I don't think US have too much leverage on this one unless those global companies are willing to lose the Chinese market.
We agree more than you think, which I'll get to in a moment, but first a couple points:
> much of that economic advancement in China has happened with very protectionist policies
To a significant degree, China's growth has been due to international trade, importing materials and exporting manufactured goods.
Also, China is a developing economy; they are in a much different situation than the U.S. and different rules apply. Protectionism for the fragile industries and national economies of developing nations is expected and, to a degree, healthy. If developing economies were open to all foreign business, there would be no domestic industries left (they can't compete with businesses capitalized at Western levels, with all the other advantages of advanced economies) and be very vulnerable to the whims of foreign businesses and governments.
> nebulous concerns about the distant future
These aren't nebulous at all, but well-established laws and patterns of economics. It's as predictable as not maintaining your code - we can call the consequences far off and nebulous because they aren't immediate, but really they are entirely predictable.
> we have to throw the American labor force under the bus
I agree completely that that shouldn't happen and isn't necessary. Labor should have a seat at the table when trade is negotiated and we can have both. In fact, it is necessary to have both:
If the U.S. economy contracts or simply doesn't grow as fast, labor suffers the most. If trade with India is cut or doesn't grow as fast, that means fewer jobs for American workers. If global security is undermined, that has very serious impacts on everyone, including the workers who die on the front lines. The CEOs probably will be fine, for the most part.
The fundamental problem, IMHO, is that while free trade is good for aggregate prosperity, we don't live in aggregate; we live as individuals. If the U.S. economy grows 1% because of the efficiency of the international labor pool, but no individual's income grows 1% (except coincidentally); it doesn't help the individual who loses his/her job - their economy contracted 100%. More specifically, capital can move much faster than labor: a factory can be moved from Missouri to Guangdong much faster than the workers in Missouri can move - they can't move to China at all and finding another factory takes time, more than a lifetime for many.
Trade must serve people, as individuals, and must protect them from that economic reality.
> much of that economic advancement in China has happened with very protectionist policies
To a significant degree, China's growth has been due to international trade, importing materials and exporting manufactured goods.
Also, China is a developing economy; they are in a much different situation than the U.S. and different rules apply. Protectionism for the fragile industries and national economies of developing nations is expected and, to a degree, healthy. If developing economies were open to all foreign business, there would be no domestic industries left (they can't compete with businesses capitalized at Western levels, with all the other advantages of advanced economies) and be very vulnerable to the whims of foreign businesses and governments.
> nebulous concerns about the distant future
These aren't nebulous at all, but well-established laws and patterns of economics. It's as predictable as not maintaining your code - we can call the consequences far off and nebulous because they aren't immediate, but really they are entirely predictable.
> we have to throw the American labor force under the bus
I agree completely that that shouldn't happen and isn't necessary. Labor should have a seat at the table when trade is negotiated and we can have both. In fact, it is necessary to have both:
If the U.S. economy contracts or simply doesn't grow as fast, labor suffers the most. If trade with India is cut or doesn't grow as fast, that means fewer jobs for American workers. If global security is undermined, that has very serious impacts on everyone, including the workers who die on the front lines. The CEOs probably will be fine, for the most part.
The fundamental problem, IMHO, is that while free trade is good for aggregate prosperity, we don't live in aggregate; we live as individuals. If the U.S. economy grows 1% because of the efficiency of the international labor pool, but no individual's income grows 1% (except coincidentally); it doesn't help the individual who loses his/her job - their economy contracted 100%. More specifically, capital can move much faster than labor: a factory can be moved from Missouri to Guangdong much faster than the workers in Missouri can move - they can't move to China at all and finding another factory takes time, more than a lifetime for many.
Trade must serve people, as individuals, and must protect them from that economic reality.
" we don't live in aggregate; we live as individuals. If the U.S. economy grows 1% because of the efficiency of the international labor pool, but no individual's income grows 1% (except coincidentally); it doesn't help the individual who loses his/her job - their economy contracted 100%. "
This is superficial reasoning. Bastiat taught economists to look beyond this obvious job loss. Protectionism causes MORE job losses than free trade. The number of jobs in an economy are a function of aggregate demand and impacted by fiscal and monetary policy-trade doesn't change it one bit. Trade changes the _nature_ of the jobs, not the number. So the right thing is to allow freedom to trade.
This is superficial reasoning. Bastiat taught economists to look beyond this obvious job loss. Protectionism causes MORE job losses than free trade. The number of jobs in an economy are a function of aggregate demand and impacted by fiscal and monetary policy-trade doesn't change it one bit. Trade changes the _nature_ of the jobs, not the number. So the right thing is to allow freedom to trade.
It's hard to understand why people are blaming the companies for playing by the rules of a system that is clearly dysfunctional. The current system clearly doesn't reward applicants who are smart and talented. In fact, the current system doesn't even recognise smarts and talent as valid considerations. It sets an extremely low bar, and when deluged by a large number of applicants, simply selects winners through an idiotic random lottery.
Given the way the system is set up, of course consulting companies are going to file applications for an extremely large number of mediocre applicants, and not a small number of supremely qualified applicants. This isn't even a loophole, it's simply exercising an intended feature of the system.
Everyone has known for years that the system is broken, but no one in government has the courage to pass meaningful immigration reform. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame your representatives in Washington.
Given the way the system is set up, of course consulting companies are going to file applications for an extremely large number of mediocre applicants, and not a small number of supremely qualified applicants. This isn't even a loophole, it's simply exercising an intended feature of the system.
Everyone has known for years that the system is broken, but no one in government has the courage to pass meaningful immigration reform. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame your representatives in Washington.
You can hate the player and the game.
They are asking you to hate the people who make the rules. The players are incidental.
I hate players who are continually falling over in the penalty area like they were shot at the slightest touch from the defender when it probably would have been easier to stay on their feet and have a fair go. They are ruining the game for everyone.
As a football fan myself, this was one of the things that really annoyed me about the game's rules.
A) The consequences for committing a very light foul just inside the penalty box is way too high, compared to the penalty for committing a light foul just outside. For the former, you get an almost-guaranteed goal. For the latter, you get a free kick which comes to nothing most of the time. There needs to be some better middle ground here.
B) The ref only ever calls penalty kicks if the striker takes a fall. If the striker gets fouled, but still make a brave effort to continue playing, the ref simply lets the game continue. If players were not penalized for staying on their feet, I'm sure you'll see a lot more people doing so.
A) The consequences for committing a very light foul just inside the penalty box is way too high, compared to the penalty for committing a light foul just outside. For the former, you get an almost-guaranteed goal. For the latter, you get a free kick which comes to nothing most of the time. There needs to be some better middle ground here.
B) The ref only ever calls penalty kicks if the striker takes a fall. If the striker gets fouled, but still make a brave effort to continue playing, the ref simply lets the game continue. If players were not penalized for staying on their feet, I'm sure you'll see a lot more people doing so.
The system needs to address 2 issues:
1. Real advance skilled labor, not menial skills 2. Fair distribution. Companies need to get a fair shot to get what they need and no single company ought to be allowed to hog the permits
1. Real advance skilled labor, not menial skills 2. Fair distribution. Companies need to get a fair shot to get what they need and no single company ought to be allowed to hog the permits
I'm curious, why fair distribution?
Better question, if there are 100 visas allowed, and 80 experts needed for software, and 50 experts needed for bio, then how do you compare software experts vs bio experts? What metric do you use to justify someone is more of an expert overall? It is apples and oranges.
Arguably, the most effective justification is that experts in X are compensated higher, therefore they must extract more value for the US economy, than experts in Y. A simple sort on minimum-guaranteed-salary seems best.
However, this stops being the case if we have no cap. But a limitless H1B systems is not a likely reality.
Better question, if there are 100 visas allowed, and 80 experts needed for software, and 50 experts needed for bio, then how do you compare software experts vs bio experts? What metric do you use to justify someone is more of an expert overall? It is apples and oranges.
Arguably, the most effective justification is that experts in X are compensated higher, therefore they must extract more value for the US economy, than experts in Y. A simple sort on minimum-guaranteed-salary seems best.
However, this stops being the case if we have no cap. But a limitless H1B systems is not a likely reality.
You missed the follow on statement (quoted below). We would not want 1 or 2 companies to hog the visas, right?
==== Fair distribution. Companies need to get a fair shot to get what they need and no single company ought to be allowed to hog the permits reply
==== Fair distribution. Companies need to get a fair shot to get what they need and no single company ought to be allowed to hog the permits reply
Im not sure I understand. You're suggesting that "if only one company can afford experts, that would be unfair"?
This sounds like you have an issue with "free market" economics. You seem to be arguing from the point of view of an idealist, not a pragmatist. I'm a pragmatist. Sadly, I'm not sure our conversation would amount to anything constructive.
This sounds like you have an issue with "free market" economics. You seem to be arguing from the point of view of an idealist, not a pragmatist. I'm a pragmatist. Sadly, I'm not sure our conversation would amount to anything constructive.
"A simple sort on minimum-guaranteed-salary seems best." How would do you handle crucial skilled jobs that don't pay a lot or where there isn't a lot of competition?
If it actually crucial, they can pay enough to guaranteee they get the visa.
You're assuming a certain profitability and cost profile for industries and businesses where this is not the case. Take the arts and music for example.
Example: Sound designers and sound mixers typically do not make a six figure salary in the US. The industry is essential to many fields, including advertising, theater, television, etc.
Supply/Demand is also a function of how much the employer has to pay.
Example: Sound designers and sound mixers typically do not make a six figure salary in the US. The industry is essential to many fields, including advertising, theater, television, etc.
Supply/Demand is also a function of how much the employer has to pay.
:) you're being facetious correct? advertising, has no money? television, has no money?
But more importantly, you haven't then answered my question.
> Better question, if there are 100 visas allowed, and 80 experts needed for software, and 50 experts needed for bio, then how do you compare software experts vs bio experts? What metric do you use to justify someone is more of an expert overall? It is apples and oranges.
But more importantly, you haven't then answered my question.
> Better question, if there are 100 visas allowed, and 80 experts needed for software, and 50 experts needed for bio, then how do you compare software experts vs bio experts? What metric do you use to justify someone is more of an expert overall? It is apples and oranges.
I believe the H1B regulations already have lower requirements for non-profit employers, and I'm all in favor of this continuing.
Conversely, if a for-profit company claims that they are "essential to the economy", but make so little profits that they can't afford H1B visas, I'd be extremely skeptical of such claims. It undermines the entire premise of a free-market economy.
Conversely, if a for-profit company claims that they are "essential to the economy", but make so little profits that they can't afford H1B visas, I'd be extremely skeptical of such claims. It undermines the entire premise of a free-market economy.
What is your particular definition of crucial?
You might find that without any cyclical dependencies, it is really hard to define "crucial" without ending up on "provide most value". And when discussing jobs which "provide most value" you are forced into a corner accepting that the highest paid positions are the ones which the market has determined as "providing most value".
You might find that without any cyclical dependencies, it is really hard to define "crucial" without ending up on "provide most value". And when discussing jobs which "provide most value" you are forced into a corner accepting that the highest paid positions are the ones which the market has determined as "providing most value".
> It's hard to understand why people are blaming the companies for playing by the rules of a system that is clearly dysfunctional.
They weren't playing by the rules, that's the point. The problem is no agency really had the authority to do anything about it (i.e., the rules were mostly in practice unenforceable.) It was essentially one of the many, many "good faith" type of laws we have in the US, where the government simply assumes that, because laws and rules exist, they will be followed, and there's a very high bar for action to be taken against lawbreakers. Whether you ascribe that to malice or incompetence on the part of our lawmakers is up to you.
From the GAO report on H1Bs:
> Under the law, in certifying employers’ initial requests for H-1B workers, Labor is limited to ensuring that the employer’s application form has no obvious errors or omissions. It does not have the authority to verify whether information provided by employers on labor conditions, such as wages to be paid, is correct. Moreover, some of this same information is reviewed again by INS during its assessment of employer requests for workers. Further, Labor has limited authority to ensure that employers are actually complying with the law’s requirements after the H-1B workers are employed in the United States. Unlike under other labor laws it enforces, Labor generally cannot initiate enforcement actions (such as conducting investigations and subpoenaing employer records), even if it believes employers are violating the law. [2]
Keep this in mind when people tell you there's no such thing as H1B abuse because the rules say they're required to pay the prevailing wage, or that they have to try to hire Americans first. For decades there have been virtually no consequences for flagrantly violating the rules. If it was especially egregious then you might face a lawsuit...but since you're a corporation with deep pockets and then people suing you are generally laid-off employees, that's a small risk, and you probably end up settling. [1] Keep in mind that no matter how much people cheerlead H1B, this [3] is the day-to-day reality: Americans being fired and their work being contracted out to these massive H1B firms on the cheap.
I'm not against a visa allowing companies to hire talent they really can't get in the US, but that is not at all the reality of the H1B program as it exists today, and thousands of people have suffered for it.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/us/lawsuit-claims-disney-...
[2] http://www.gao.gov/new.items/he00157.pdf
[3] http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-201502...
They weren't playing by the rules, that's the point. The problem is no agency really had the authority to do anything about it (i.e., the rules were mostly in practice unenforceable.) It was essentially one of the many, many "good faith" type of laws we have in the US, where the government simply assumes that, because laws and rules exist, they will be followed, and there's a very high bar for action to be taken against lawbreakers. Whether you ascribe that to malice or incompetence on the part of our lawmakers is up to you.
From the GAO report on H1Bs:
> Under the law, in certifying employers’ initial requests for H-1B workers, Labor is limited to ensuring that the employer’s application form has no obvious errors or omissions. It does not have the authority to verify whether information provided by employers on labor conditions, such as wages to be paid, is correct. Moreover, some of this same information is reviewed again by INS during its assessment of employer requests for workers. Further, Labor has limited authority to ensure that employers are actually complying with the law’s requirements after the H-1B workers are employed in the United States. Unlike under other labor laws it enforces, Labor generally cannot initiate enforcement actions (such as conducting investigations and subpoenaing employer records), even if it believes employers are violating the law. [2]
Keep this in mind when people tell you there's no such thing as H1B abuse because the rules say they're required to pay the prevailing wage, or that they have to try to hire Americans first. For decades there have been virtually no consequences for flagrantly violating the rules. If it was especially egregious then you might face a lawsuit...but since you're a corporation with deep pockets and then people suing you are generally laid-off employees, that's a small risk, and you probably end up settling. [1] Keep in mind that no matter how much people cheerlead H1B, this [3] is the day-to-day reality: Americans being fired and their work being contracted out to these massive H1B firms on the cheap.
I'm not against a visa allowing companies to hire talent they really can't get in the US, but that is not at all the reality of the H1B program as it exists today, and thousands of people have suffered for it.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/us/lawsuit-claims-disney-...
[2] http://www.gao.gov/new.items/he00157.pdf
[3] http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-201502...
because it is kind of like cutting in line, just because there is no explicit rule and someone isn't punching you in the face for doing it, doesn't make it okay.
I've said this before in other related threads. My wife is indian and her first job in the states was with cognizant.
Cognizant is unequivocally the worst most atrocious slave labor, nepotism infested, abusive companies She and I have ever been exposed to.
They treated her like a slave.
Making her do the work of others and letting the other person get the credit.
Passing her up on raises and promotions no matter how well she did in "reviews" or how many awards they gave her and the clients she worked for gave her. I would lost the clients she worked for but I won't. They should be ashamed for hiring cognizant. Absolutely shamed to death.
Making her stay up late to take offshore conference calls to India to work with her incompetent offshore team. Who were all related. It's so incestuous how indian IT works. Southern Indians really dislike northern Indians which I never understood no matter how many times it's explained to me. So there is some racism involved in indian IT as well as nepotism.
She was severely underpaid. I mean laughable so. Like 50% less of what she made at her next job.
She was lied to constantly. Especially about moving expenses being covered and then they would refuse to talk about why they only paid half of what the agreed to pay.
They just treated her like a slave. It's a wretched company run by wretched people from the bottom to the top. I hope they all get hit by bus.
Cognizant is unequivocally the worst most atrocious slave labor, nepotism infested, abusive companies She and I have ever been exposed to.
They treated her like a slave.
Making her do the work of others and letting the other person get the credit.
Passing her up on raises and promotions no matter how well she did in "reviews" or how many awards they gave her and the clients she worked for gave her. I would lost the clients she worked for but I won't. They should be ashamed for hiring cognizant. Absolutely shamed to death.
Making her stay up late to take offshore conference calls to India to work with her incompetent offshore team. Who were all related. It's so incestuous how indian IT works. Southern Indians really dislike northern Indians which I never understood no matter how many times it's explained to me. So there is some racism involved in indian IT as well as nepotism.
She was severely underpaid. I mean laughable so. Like 50% less of what she made at her next job.
She was lied to constantly. Especially about moving expenses being covered and then they would refuse to talk about why they only paid half of what the agreed to pay.
They just treated her like a slave. It's a wretched company run by wretched people from the bottom to the top. I hope they all get hit by bus.
I think agreed with you on related threads on slave part.
>Southern Indians really dislike northern Indians which I never understood
Its a good point. Its true for the opposite too. I think its based on who is running the management. If south-indian occupies the managerial position, north-indian dislikes him and if north-indian is the manager, then south-indians dislike him.
As long as South-Indian and North-Indian works at same category there is lesser dislike between each other.
>Southern Indians really dislike northern Indians which I never understood
Its a good point. Its true for the opposite too. I think its based on who is running the management. If south-indian occupies the managerial position, north-indian dislikes him and if north-indian is the manager, then south-indians dislike him.
As long as South-Indian and North-Indian works at same category there is lesser dislike between each other.
> TCS, Infosys, Cognizant
they're also run and managed by real assholes. complete entitlement complex - definitely a sign of corruption / abuse.
they're also run and managed by real assholes. complete entitlement complex - definitely a sign of corruption / abuse.
Why isn't Wipro on this list?
They are about half the size of the rest. Accenture should really be on the list. They have almost as many people as Tata.
Or IBM Global Services, CapGemini, Accenture etc?
You can add Capgemini too.
These companies should be driven out of business, by whatever means necessary. They are terrible.
> they're also run and managed by real assholes. complete entitlement complex - definitely a sign of corruption / abuse.
Examples? Not saying you are wrong, just want to understand.
> They are terrible.
Reasons? Again, just trying to understand perspectives.
Examples? Not saying you are wrong, just want to understand.
> They are terrible.
Reasons? Again, just trying to understand perspectives.
they treat their employees and sales/solutions partners (even americans) like fucking garbage. like, the problems only barely begin at not paying their bills and speaking rudely to people on the phone. it's 100% indicative of some kind of a guaranteed revenue stream. nobody else acts that way, not even i.e. oracle or microsoft. in fact big "real" technology companies are usually a pleasure to deal with once you understand how they work.
and it's not just the big players -- there are dozens if not hundreds of little cottage industries bodyshops that use their previous bigfirm alumni connections to do the exact same thing. fuck all of them. ever hear of an "approved vendors list"? those are all now hijacked by bodyshop crony dipshits. and that's just the tip of the scam iceberg. i haven't dealt with any of these assholes in over 5 years and it still makes me angry.
excuse my french but this is a HUGE problem in our industry and needs straight talk. h1b's aren't the only people they abuse. that's just the engine that drives the entire shit show forward.
and it's not just the big players -- there are dozens if not hundreds of little cottage industries bodyshops that use their previous bigfirm alumni connections to do the exact same thing. fuck all of them. ever hear of an "approved vendors list"? those are all now hijacked by bodyshop crony dipshits. and that's just the tip of the scam iceberg. i haven't dealt with any of these assholes in over 5 years and it still makes me angry.
excuse my french but this is a HUGE problem in our industry and needs straight talk. h1b's aren't the only people they abuse. that's just the engine that drives the entire shit show forward.
Exactly what is the scam here?
I understand to you think they (TCS etc.) are rude and not well-qualified but there are American customers who are paying for their consulting services by the hour; I assume they are fundamentally satisfied otherwise they would go elsewhere?
That they are putting in a lot applications - that seems to be within the letter of the law; maybe not the intention but I am not sure as this have been going for a while.
I understand to you think they (TCS etc.) are rude and not well-qualified but there are American customers who are paying for their consulting services by the hour; I assume they are fundamentally satisfied otherwise they would go elsewhere?
That they are putting in a lot applications - that seems to be within the letter of the law; maybe not the intention but I am not sure as this have been going for a while.
This is how it works.
They're fundamentally satisfied because their staffing budgets look awesomely low, there is a latency between the time the hiring is done and the dung hits the turbine, then they somehow manage to pass the blame for the shitty systems on to external factors, and they move on to a higher paid position or take their golden parachute before the horrible reality sinks in to those left behind that they have been royally shafted. The shaftees are too embarrassed to admit they were hoodwinked (and stupid), so they make excuses too, and the cycle repeats.
The whole time this is happening, the competent engineers have been screaming and rending their garments, to no avail, until they are laid off for not being team players or for earning too much.
They're fundamentally satisfied because their staffing budgets look awesomely low, there is a latency between the time the hiring is done and the dung hits the turbine, then they somehow manage to pass the blame for the shitty systems on to external factors, and they move on to a higher paid position or take their golden parachute before the horrible reality sinks in to those left behind that they have been royally shafted. The shaftees are too embarrassed to admit they were hoodwinked (and stupid), so they make excuses too, and the cycle repeats.
The whole time this is happening, the competent engineers have been screaming and rending their garments, to no avail, until they are laid off for not being team players or for earning too much.
The people that pay the bills are frequently several layers removed from actually working with these outfits.
This. In a lot of companies, top management are the ones that make the decision to outsource - and for a lot of them, cost is by far the largest factor they care about. The people below them get to firefight and deal with the fallout.
[deleted]
It's not just IT, it's just like this in law with document review sweatshops and we are American citizens!
The three combined employ close to 7,00,000 people. Many of them Americans. They should be disciplined not destroyed.
We are always do afraid of destroying big corporations because of the associated jobs. However, if there was a demanded that those companies were filling then other companies will take their place and grow to fill that demand. Companies that get frequently replaced by innovative competitors and get seriously punished for misbehavior rather than just getting off with a small find would make for a much more competitive economy and a more desirable society.
Why not destroyed? It should be easier for companies to lose their corporate charters, because it sets a bad example to others if they can profit from being a bad citizen. In other words, you're going to invite to your party someone who previously shit in your pool?
Those are jobs primarily taken from other workers, not new jobs being created. If these companies didn't exist (and they shouldn't), that many jobs would be held by better paid American counterparts instead.
It should be 700,000 and I don't know if most of them are Americans, from what I see those companies have acquired a lot of other businesses around the world and hire people there also. So for sure they employ around 700k people around the world but saying that most of them are americans would probably need some source to back it up.
EDIT: TCS had "The number of non-Indian nationals was 21,282" in 2013.
EDIT2: Cognizant "The company has more than 255,800 employees globally, of which over 150,000 are in India"
EDIT3: Infosys "Its workforce consists of employees representing 122 nationalities working from 32 countries (37 countries as per the base location)."
So Americans are minority in those companies.
EDIT: TCS had "The number of non-Indian nationals was 21,282" in 2013.
EDIT2: Cognizant "The company has more than 255,800 employees globally, of which over 150,000 are in India"
EDIT3: Infosys "Its workforce consists of employees representing 122 nationalities working from 32 countries (37 countries as per the base location)."
So Americans are minority in those companies.
As an aside, "7,00,000" is common to see in India. 1,00,000 (100,000) is 1 lakh. So 700,000 is said as "seven lakh" and written as 7,00,000.
If you go even higher, 10,000,000 is written as "10,00,00,000" and called "1 crore".
If you go even higher, 10,000,000 is written as "10,00,00,000" and called "1 crore".
The last number you wrote (10,00,00,000) is ten crore, not one.
You're totally right and the commas should have tipped me off to that.
[deleted]
You focussed on wrong things.
No one said Most of Them. I said Many of Them. There's a difference. And if it wasn't clear earlier, let me state it clearly. The three companies have most of their employees in India. But there are people employed in other countries too.
No one said Most of Them. I said Many of Them. There's a difference. And if it wasn't clear earlier, let me state it clearly. The three companies have most of their employees in India. But there are people employed in other countries too.
#1. Are you kidding me? This is a ridiculous way of fixing the problem. The targets should be big cos like Bank of America, Citibank etc (even WH favorite Harley Davidson) which use these "giants" as a proxy to hire these H1-B authorized employees.
#2. If a group of people are willing to do your job for less money (as much as you'd like to point out the quality, it's probably good enough), your job WILL be fucked with or without H1-B visas. That is how a capitalism works.
Sure fix the H1B system but only you can fix your inefficiency. Big cos will find the most efficient route for getting good enough quality of work doen and most of the work is / will be shipped offshore.
#2. If a group of people are willing to do your job for less money (as much as you'd like to point out the quality, it's probably good enough), your job WILL be fucked with or without H1-B visas. That is how a capitalism works.
Sure fix the H1B system but only you can fix your inefficiency. Big cos will find the most efficient route for getting good enough quality of work doen and most of the work is / will be shipped offshore.
It never ceases to amaze me how unqualified people from these consulting companies are, an absolute nightmare to interact with them.
Same type of abuse happening in Canada.
I understand your views. Just few days back, One of my friend (networker/backup admin) from outsourced company called me and we had below chat:
friend: "As a developer, you guys don't really care about jargons MB and GB? like 4GB of RAM? Is that hard for you to understand?"
me:"No,thats pretty basic to know about MB/GB..why you are asking?"
friend: "10+ yr .net dev joined our team a month ago, while discussing something he told us he don't know what is MB and GB!".
me:"No way, he must be joking"
friend: "No, no he is pretty serious. He said, as a experienced dev, don't need to handle with hardwares and such..so don't know about all these MB's and GB's mean, like testers/sys.admin do."
Guess what, this 10+yr guy, worked in Dubai (onsite) for few years and returned to India.
friend: "As a developer, you guys don't really care about jargons MB and GB? like 4GB of RAM? Is that hard for you to understand?"
me:"No,thats pretty basic to know about MB/GB..why you are asking?"
friend: "10+ yr .net dev joined our team a month ago, while discussing something he told us he don't know what is MB and GB!".
me:"No way, he must be joking"
friend: "No, no he is pretty serious. He said, as a experienced dev, don't need to handle with hardwares and such..so don't know about all these MB's and GB's mean, like testers/sys.admin do."
Guess what, this 10+yr guy, worked in Dubai (onsite) for few years and returned to India.
And how much they are payed by their customers for essentially warm bodies and churning crappy Java code
The folks from InfoSys I've worked with have been less than impressive (the Windows driver expert who showed up on the first day of the contract gig with a couple of new books on writing Windows drivers under his arm, for instance).
The other H1Bs I've worked with have in general been good, often above average, and a few have been absolutely world class and people that I'd love to work with again . . . but the distribution is not what you'd expect for a program officially intended to fill in gaps of expertise and to supplement the US workforce where it is lacking otherwise unobtainable staff.
The other H1Bs I've worked with have in general been good, often above average, and a few have been absolutely world class and people that I'd love to work with again . . . but the distribution is not what you'd expect for a program officially intended to fill in gaps of expertise and to supplement the US workforce where it is lacking otherwise unobtainable staff.
If you judge a professional because he or she showed up with books for their area of expertise, then you have ways to go still ... get out, see more of the world, get some perspective :)
Reference material, fine. "Windows Drivers for Beginners", probably a bad sign, something that I confirmed in the first 5-10 minutes of working with the contractor in question.
[I've been writing software for a living since the late 1970s, working on products that you've almost certainly heard of and some you've probably used, and I've got enough perspective and experience to be a pretty good judge of someone's level of expertise]
[I've been writing software for a living since the late 1970s, working on products that you've almost certainly heard of and some you've probably used, and I've got enough perspective and experience to be a pretty good judge of someone's level of expertise]
We all have ways to go regardless of how many years we have walked :)
There's a ton of H-1Bs at the top Bay Area tech companies. The media (and the Trump admin) makes it to be as if H-1Bs are for Indian body shops, but I'm not sure that's true. How many H-1Bs does Google have compared to say TCS?
http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2016-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx
Infosys alone has 33000 applications in 2016. Google only had 4000. These numbers include renewals, but still.
Infosys alone has 33000 applications in 2016. Google only had 4000. These numbers include renewals, but still.
I think 90 vs. few hundred, can't remember the precise figures.
I'm not a fan of the Trump administration, but I'm glad they're trying to reform the H1B program.
Hell, Republicans are the ones that are actually trying to improve employment based immigration. I actually believe Republicans to have the most reasonable immigration policies.
You're quite wrong. The current DOJ head is the most anti-legal immigration (incl. high-skilled immigration) person to ever lead that department. Also Trump, in his campaign website said the most extreme thing that any Republican candidate has said -- that the US would "pause issuing employment-based green cards until every American is employed." Things can't get any more extreme than that.
Trump has also proposed pursuing a merit based immigration system.[0]
A Republican representative has proposed legislation for the millions of undocumented immigrants brought as children.[1]
A Republican introduced a bill to improve the E2 visa program.[2]
I grew up as an undocumented immigrant in California (I left voluntarily after graduating high school to live in Mexico). I have yet to see something to actually improve _legal_ immigration from the Democrats. All they talk about is a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers without actually trying to improve immigration based on merit.
[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/immigration-t...
[1]: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article1...
[2]: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1834
A Republican representative has proposed legislation for the millions of undocumented immigrants brought as children.[1]
A Republican introduced a bill to improve the E2 visa program.[2]
I grew up as an undocumented immigrant in California (I left voluntarily after graduating high school to live in Mexico). I have yet to see something to actually improve _legal_ immigration from the Democrats. All they talk about is a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers without actually trying to improve immigration based on merit.
[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/immigration-t...
[1]: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article1...
[2]: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1834
Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have proposed, and sponsored, legislation that would increase legal immigration, and help undocumented immigrants gain legal status. The problem is that while the vast majority of Democrats in Congress support such reform, less than 50% of Republicans support it.
Just as an example, take a look at the bill that came closest to greatly improving our legal immigration system[1], and helping undocumented immigrants (S.744 of the 113th Congress), which passed with a super-majority in the Senate[2]. It was promoted and sponsored by some very well-known Republican Senators (e.g. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, etc).
This bill contained provisions that would have fixed many of issues discussed in this thread, like what these unscrupulous consulting companies are doing with the current system. It would have made it easier for skilled immigrants to get green cards, for foreign students to stay in the country after they graduate, among many many other things. It was a compromise between parties, but yet it was a beautiful bill.
But Republicans in the House, lead by then-Speaker John Boehner prevented the bill from even being voted on. If the bill had been allowed a vote, it would have easily passed the House, and become law today. But a minority of the House (i.e. a majority of the Republicans in the House) unilaterally blocked passage of the bill. John Boehner actually said that the Republican party would "be over" if the 11-12 million undocumented immigrants were allowed to acquire citizenship eventually (as the bill would have enabled them to).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Security,_Economic_Oppo...
[2] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/s168
Just as an example, take a look at the bill that came closest to greatly improving our legal immigration system[1], and helping undocumented immigrants (S.744 of the 113th Congress), which passed with a super-majority in the Senate[2]. It was promoted and sponsored by some very well-known Republican Senators (e.g. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, etc).
This bill contained provisions that would have fixed many of issues discussed in this thread, like what these unscrupulous consulting companies are doing with the current system. It would have made it easier for skilled immigrants to get green cards, for foreign students to stay in the country after they graduate, among many many other things. It was a compromise between parties, but yet it was a beautiful bill.
But Republicans in the House, lead by then-Speaker John Boehner prevented the bill from even being voted on. If the bill had been allowed a vote, it would have easily passed the House, and become law today. But a minority of the House (i.e. a majority of the Republicans in the House) unilaterally blocked passage of the bill. John Boehner actually said that the Republican party would "be over" if the 11-12 million undocumented immigrants were allowed to acquire citizenship eventually (as the bill would have enabled them to).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Security,_Economic_Oppo...
[2] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/s168
He's not trying to reform it, too many of his friends' profit margins rely on this behavior. It's probably more likely that they didn't bribe the right people and now have to be taxed with a fine (without admitting wrongdoing).
I'm sorry, but without any evidence your post comes off as anti-Trump conspiracy theory. What fines are you even talking about?
[deleted]
Given the highly anti-immigration track record of the Trump administration, I doubt any reforms coming from them will be good ones.
Great, but without any counter arguments you're not going to convince me. What specific problems do you see with this reform?
Real life is more nuanced than "everything Trump does is bad," and companies (these three especially) have abused H1B to keep wages low and decrease employee leverage, so I'm glad to see a crack down.
Real life is more nuanced than "everything Trump does is bad," and companies (these three especially) have abused H1B to keep wages low and decrease employee leverage, so I'm glad to see a crack down.
A few of my coworkers are on cognizant and can tell you that they are evil. My coworkers are great engineers and the company I work for wants to hire them full time but can't because cognizant won't allow them to be bought out of their contract. I get it, they need to make their money but holding people back from having a better opportunities ain't right.
How is it evil to protect one's own self interest? Cognizant did all the work to get the contract. This is similar to a non-compete. If the coworkers are great, they will be great in another environment as well, and H1B work auths are portable.
Yeah, who cares what the employee/person wants, or where they want to work? They belong to Cognizant to decide where they will work, for whom, apparently.
You've basically highlighted one of the biggest problems with H1B, the potential for what effectively amounts to indentured servitude.
You've basically highlighted one of the biggest problems with H1B, the potential for what effectively amounts to indentured servitude.
Sorry you're not making any sense. H1B is at-will employment and is portable.
Any consulting company will want to protect their investments from being poached and it has nothing to do with the work auth status of their employees.
Any consulting company will want to protect their investments from being poached and it has nothing to do with the work auth status of their employees.
Yeah, I am in no denial about the desire of TCS etc al to protect their investment. I know how much they're hurting.
Which is why they're doing the right thing by almost never agreeing to buy out clauses in their contract, which are really only their to provide an illusion of flexibility. This prevents "poaching" (hint : when you pay a fingers fee it cases to be passing) and hey, if your servant, I mean employee finds some other employer to go work for you can always fire them and institute revocation proceedings with US IS. That won't have a chilling effect at all (or as you CALL, "protecting your investment"). And I'm sure it's only a coincidence that on many occasions the Big Three have been accused of sharing blacklists of employees, too?
Which is why they're doing the right thing by almost never agreeing to buy out clauses in their contract, which are really only their to provide an illusion of flexibility. This prevents "poaching" (hint : when you pay a fingers fee it cases to be passing) and hey, if your servant, I mean employee finds some other employer to go work for you can always fire them and institute revocation proceedings with US IS. That won't have a chilling effect at all (or as you CALL, "protecting your investment"). And I'm sure it's only a coincidence that on many occasions the Big Three have been accused of sharing blacklists of employees, too?
I read the article. I am still not sure which rule was violated by these companies. Can someone tell me which violation is being referred in this article?
Also, about the average wage. TCS, Infosys, Cognizant send their employees in all states of US. Including the the states in south, mid-west, and Appalachian region. So what is this comparison with salaries in Silicon Valley?
Also, about the average wage. TCS, Infosys, Cognizant send their employees in all states of US. Including the the states in south, mid-west, and Appalachian region. So what is this comparison with salaries in Silicon Valley?
Everyone here complains, "I've said it before it's broken". Alright, that's easy to say, implement a better solution then? I can't think of any.
How is merit going to be measured? Prove me there can be a rule set that performs better. That's where I'd like the conversation to be at.
How is merit going to be measured? Prove me there can be a rule set that performs better. That's where I'd like the conversation to be at.
An easy solution is to make the probability of getting the H1B lottery proportional to the proposed salary. You would think that companies would be willing to pay more for better talent, so salary could be a useful measure of talent. Maybe then add some normalization with respect to the median salary for that particular industry and locality.
You've got my favorite proposal so far. It would still allow the occasional oddball, but would bias towards companies who truly show desire to acquire the talent.
I'm not convinced we can conceive a normalization scheme that wouldn't end up unwillingly benefiting certain companies and industries and states over others though.
I'm not convinced we can conceive a normalization scheme that wouldn't end up unwillingly benefiting certain companies and industries and states over others though.
I agree. I can think of two proposals which are both superior to the current system.
A) Get the rid of the H1B cap, and set the minimum income requirement to $100k/year. If you're smart enough and talented enough that someone is willing to pay you 6 figures, you would be an asset to this country and there will always be room for you here.
B) Keep the H1B cap, and auction off the visas using annual salaries. If there are more applicants than visas, the people who get paid the most will get the visa.
I won't pretend that either proposal is perfect, but it's sure better than the current broken system.
A) Get the rid of the H1B cap, and set the minimum income requirement to $100k/year. If you're smart enough and talented enough that someone is willing to pay you 6 figures, you would be an asset to this country and there will always be room for you here.
B) Keep the H1B cap, and auction off the visas using annual salaries. If there are more applicants than visas, the people who get paid the most will get the visa.
I won't pretend that either proposal is perfect, but it's sure better than the current broken system.
I think for A, you'd have to still normalize and keep reviewing the threshold yearly. 100k is junior salary for SDE in SF for example.
B has the normalization problem full blown.
I'm thinking all we could do is cap outsourcing companies. If you don't plan on having the employee work on your own products, then you're limited to a smaller number of foreign hires a year.
B has the normalization problem full blown.
I'm thinking all we could do is cap outsourcing companies. If you don't plan on having the employee work on your own products, then you're limited to a smaller number of foreign hires a year.
> "you'd have to still normalize and keep reviewing the threshold yearly. 100k is junior salary for SDE in SF for example."
I agree about reviewing the threshold yearly, and indexing for inflation.
Why normalize for region though? Why should companies in SF be penalized by the visa system just because they pay high salaries? I stand by my earlier assertion that anyone whom a company deems valuable enough to pay six figures, is valuable enough to be an asset to this nation.
I agree about reviewing the threshold yearly, and indexing for inflation.
Why normalize for region though? Why should companies in SF be penalized by the visa system just because they pay high salaries? I stand by my earlier assertion that anyone whom a company deems valuable enough to pay six figures, is valuable enough to be an asset to this nation.
> Why should companies in SF be penalized by the visa system just because they pay high salaries?
Well 100k in SF is not equal to exceptional talent. So for 100k, you'd bring engineers who don't fit your definition of "deserving to be here". While 100k in say Nashville, well that's definitly going to be someone exceptional if a Nashville company is willing to spend it on them.
So in SF, to infer that the candidate truly merits to be here, he needs to be expanssive to those companies, and 100k in SF is not.
Well 100k in SF is not equal to exceptional talent. So for 100k, you'd bring engineers who don't fit your definition of "deserving to be here". While 100k in say Nashville, well that's definitly going to be someone exceptional if a Nashville company is willing to spend it on them.
So in SF, to infer that the candidate truly merits to be here, he needs to be expanssive to those companies, and 100k in SF is not.
I think the key factor isn't "how valuable is she to the company", but rather, "how valuable is she to the economy". There's a significant difference between the 2. Someone who is slightly important to Google, is still a lot more valuable to the national economy, compared to someone who is very important to {random_mediocre_business}.
I thought this was about giving Americans a chance at those jobs. If the focus is the economy, we probably want to allow even more foreign workers. What is the issue with the H1-B visa in terms of the economy?
For A, isn't it a risk that only certain areas of the country will get the ability to acquire talent from abroad? Or that only rich companies can afford this, and have a better chance?
For B, you really want to give your highly paid jobs to foreign workers, who can easily leave the country with all that money? Once again, the richer the company, the better the chance.
For B, you really want to give your highly paid jobs to foreign workers, who can easily leave the country with all that money? Once again, the richer the company, the better the chance.
If you put floors on the salary for H1Bs that are higher than the prevailing wage then the companies using H1Bs will self select the more skilled employees. Right now a H1B employee costs less than a local American so companies who are price sensitive go for the H1B's. If you flip the cost on that companies will only go after H1B's if they really have some skill that they cannot get locally
But how do you normalize that? If you cap at 100k, you prevent almost all non Californian companies from hiring abroad. It's a bit like the minimum wage problem.
Just rank by salary and pick the top N? There's plenty of things to bikeshed over, like how to adjust for cost of living, but I don't see how you could argue that this could be any worse than literal random chance.
You imply normalizing across role and geography is trivial, but it's not. Maybe you're smarter then me though, so please proceed to detail your rule set.
Btw, this is the only scheme I think could be better, but I actually don't hear a lot of people bringing it up. And when I think more about it, I'm not sure it's possible to implement.
Lotterie is in a way a solution to the normalization problem. Given two companies in different places, both who've interviewed a different candidate and believe they merit to get the job, and are both willing to pay a different amount for the candidate. You could say, instead of attempting to normalize and risking possibly high false positive, we will randomly distribute. That's a normalization scheme.
Btw, this is the only scheme I think could be better, but I actually don't hear a lot of people bringing it up. And when I think more about it, I'm not sure it's possible to implement.
Lotterie is in a way a solution to the normalization problem. Given two companies in different places, both who've interviewed a different candidate and believe they merit to get the job, and are both willing to pay a different amount for the candidate. You could say, instead of attempting to normalize and risking possibly high false positive, we will randomly distribute. That's a normalization scheme.
Nasscom's response: http://www.livemint.com/Industry/pHkRcTtIoKd8MkTkBNdtSN/Info...
"Infosys, TCS accounted for only 8.8% of total H1B visas"
"All Indian IT companies cumulatively account for less than 20% of the total approved H1B visas although Indian nationals get about 71% of the H1B visas,” Nasscom said. It added that this is a testimony to the high skill levels of India-origin professionals. The annual number of Indian IT specialists working on temporary visas for Indian IT service companies is about 0.009% of the 158-million-member US workforce, it said."
I wonder since this data is public, how come different stats are concluded ?
"Infosys, TCS accounted for only 8.8% of total H1B visas"
"All Indian IT companies cumulatively account for less than 20% of the total approved H1B visas although Indian nationals get about 71% of the H1B visas,” Nasscom said. It added that this is a testimony to the high skill levels of India-origin professionals. The annual number of Indian IT specialists working on temporary visas for Indian IT service companies is about 0.009% of the 158-million-member US workforce, it said."
I wonder since this data is public, how come different stats are concluded ?
A large number of Indians are employed at staffing companies which are not "Indian companies". These come in two flavors:
(1) large consulting firms like Cap Gemini, Accenture, IBM Global Service etc. These are American or European competitors of TCS, Infy, Cognizant[1], Wipro.
(2) "desi body shops" which are typically run by American-Indian business community.
#2 has a long tail - there are lots of firms, and each gets a small number of H-1Bs each year. Also, fraud is much more rampant in this sector [2][3][4].
[1]: Cognizant is HQed in Teaneck, New Jersey. It started as an in-house technology unit of Dun & Bradstreet.
[2]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/couple-pleads-guilty-20...
[3]: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/25/bay-area-tech-executiv...
[4]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/virginia-immigration-atto...
(1) large consulting firms like Cap Gemini, Accenture, IBM Global Service etc. These are American or European competitors of TCS, Infy, Cognizant[1], Wipro.
(2) "desi body shops" which are typically run by American-Indian business community.
#2 has a long tail - there are lots of firms, and each gets a small number of H-1Bs each year. Also, fraud is much more rampant in this sector [2][3][4].
[1]: Cognizant is HQed in Teaneck, New Jersey. It started as an in-house technology unit of Dun & Bradstreet.
[2]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/couple-pleads-guilty-20...
[3]: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/25/bay-area-tech-executiv...
[4]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/virginia-immigration-atto...
Do they? If yes, it doesn't matter it is Trump that takes action against them, it is the right thing to do.
This is some f'd up stuff. I came here as a student for my Bachelor's degree and I wanted to gain some more experience before I go back. This is my 3rd attempt of trying to get the H1B and it just sucks to see these companies doing stuff like this.
So you did your Bachelor's in US. (1) A bachelor's degree does not make you more 'skilled' than Infosys/TCS employees. (2) You want to gain "some more" experience before you go back. And this your 3rd attempt to get H1B. So you have been working in US for 3-4 years after your bachelor's degree. Enough experience, right? Sorry to break your bubble but you are not super-talented and all the criticisms of Infosys/TCS employees applies to you too.
Have you used the OPT to get your experience?
The current US administration is all talk and no action. They raise the relevant points like stealing of jobs, visa abuse, Obama Care - Basically they aim to make america great again. Sadly there is no reforms or policies which are coming through due to lack of unity amongst republicans. So Mr. Trump is coming across as a weak and lame duck president contrary to what he claims. In terms of taking action on this current visa abuse case , its highly unlikely that anything at all is going to happen. His vision , thought process and plan are deliberately way to idealistic and destined to fail , perhaps failing as president will have a huge business gain for this person.
In most such threads the common theme is insecure and micro managing bosses. I have no idea how to deal with them.
This is a depressing thread for any Indian developer.
This is a depressing thread for any Indian developer.
There were three Trump policies I thought were good ideas (and pretty much only three).
Transparency in healthcare, labeling China a currency manipulator, and reforming the H1B visa program.
The first two have been discarded already. Curious to see what happens with this one.
Transparency in healthcare, labeling China a currency manipulator, and reforming the H1B visa program.
The first two have been discarded already. Curious to see what happens with this one.
An "on site" assignment is often mentioned as a perk when you apply to these companies. I was once offered a job by one of these three when I did some Python training for them and they needed a "tech lead".
The package they offered had less pay, no (or very low, I don't remember) stock options, less perks but (and the manager emphasised this), I'd get an "on site". I told him that I considered it a negative since I had a fairly good circle of friends professional and personal in Bangalore and didn't want to move. He couldn't really parse that and the conversation ended.
The package they offered had less pay, no (or very low, I don't remember) stock options, less perks but (and the manager emphasised this), I'd get an "on site". I told him that I considered it a negative since I had a fairly good circle of friends professional and personal in Bangalore and didn't want to move. He couldn't really parse that and the conversation ended.
I support the move, simply because I am sure these companies are abusing the spirit of H1B. But I really, really doubt if this is going to improve labor conditions or US economy by any meaningful margin. The end goal has not been clarified, and that is leading to confusion among both H1B people and US citizens. H1B visa holders already lead uncertain lives, and this is adding to the stress. Citizens who are not super well-informed are looking at all brown people as people who are taking away their jobs, and even worse, as recipients of US charity.
A perusal of the graduation rates [1] in the US in the following fields in the 2014-2015 time frame:-
1. Computer and information sciences: 59,581
2. Engineering: 97,858
3. Engineering technologies: 17,238
4. Mathematics and statistics: 21,853
5. Physical sciences and science technologies: 30,038
Roughly 225,000+ people who can most easily pick up and practice the necessary advanced computer science skills needed for advanced software work.
This is not accounting for the fact that most other commercial computing needs, as in regular corporate IT work, can be met by people who have a basic understanding of logic, math and with sufficient additional computer training.
According to the latest BLS statistics [2] there are over 69,000+ jobs open in Feb 2017 in the Information sector alone. The cited source also includes total hires and separations.
The number of open computer positions in Feb alone are almost equal to the number of annual computer/information science graduates.
Am I wrong in assuming that there are far more job openings than can be met by the number of qualified college graduates in the space?
How is this gap addressed? Do the Indian IT companies fulfill this gap? Does the BLS statistics for unfilled computer job openings factor in both the domestically produced computer graduates and the ones provided by the IT outsourcing firms (H1Bs are onsite of course)?
If so there seems to be a big gap still remaining in the supply of domestic computer graduates.
I am honestly curious and not trying to take a position on what appears to be an inflammatory and highly emotional topic.
Please correct me if I am wrong and forgive me if I am incorrectly reading the statistics.
[1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_322.10.a...
[2] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.a.htm
1. Computer and information sciences: 59,581
2. Engineering: 97,858
3. Engineering technologies: 17,238
4. Mathematics and statistics: 21,853
5. Physical sciences and science technologies: 30,038
Roughly 225,000+ people who can most easily pick up and practice the necessary advanced computer science skills needed for advanced software work.
This is not accounting for the fact that most other commercial computing needs, as in regular corporate IT work, can be met by people who have a basic understanding of logic, math and with sufficient additional computer training.
According to the latest BLS statistics [2] there are over 69,000+ jobs open in Feb 2017 in the Information sector alone. The cited source also includes total hires and separations.
The number of open computer positions in Feb alone are almost equal to the number of annual computer/information science graduates.
Am I wrong in assuming that there are far more job openings than can be met by the number of qualified college graduates in the space?
How is this gap addressed? Do the Indian IT companies fulfill this gap? Does the BLS statistics for unfilled computer job openings factor in both the domestically produced computer graduates and the ones provided by the IT outsourcing firms (H1Bs are onsite of course)?
If so there seems to be a big gap still remaining in the supply of domestic computer graduates.
I am honestly curious and not trying to take a position on what appears to be an inflammatory and highly emotional topic.
Please correct me if I am wrong and forgive me if I am incorrectly reading the statistics.
[1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_322.10.a...
[2] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.a.htm
I don't know everything about H1-B, but if companies were willing to sponsor someone for it, then that company believe they have the skills for the job no? So saying these people aren't skilled seems to me like changing the goal post no? You think they aren't skilled, but the people hiring them seem to believe they're exactly what their business need.
So maybe we should train Americans to that level that are willing to accept equally low wages. Since it appears there's a great number of jobs who want just that.
So maybe we should train Americans to that level that are willing to accept equally low wages. Since it appears there's a great number of jobs who want just that.
What's amusing about this is that it will result in more competition for American jobs in SV as google/ FB/etc will be able to hire more Indian engineers. I am skeptical that tcs/Infy/cts are going to hire Americans. They will probably just resort to more telecommuting.
Still, it's a good idea. Bringing in more talented Indians will help the economy overall, just not for American software engineers.
Still, it's a good idea. Bringing in more talented Indians will help the economy overall, just not for American software engineers.
[deleted]
Simple solution: order the applicants by decreasing order of salary, and take the top 65K. Problem solved.
I think this would be too clever by half given that many PhDs churned out from universities here earn roughly H1B prevailing wage
there are categories of H1B people: Those who come from India having "specialized skill", those who graduate with a Masters Degree in US in specialized areas like CS, Cybersecurity.
Why ignore the latter?
In other news, inflation continues to new highs.
Actually, no, inflation does not continue to new highs. Inflation is running at 2.00% right now, well below historic averages. "New highs" is somewhere north of 13%.
http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/united-states/histor...
http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/united-states/histor...
Experience with Cognizant: I've seen people, just after 2 years asked to give-up technical career and focus on management stuffs like setting up conference calls, excel work, estimation and email etc. Just after 2 years you are expected to 'mentor' (aka dump work to) the juniors.
I see, strict H1B rules is good for India too. This way, Management learns to respect real talents and not shoe-lickers(highly suspect this will happen, but slight chance) . Then people who want to go to USA, will prepare themselves technically rather than saying 'yes to boss' for everything in an attempt to get visa.
There is also misconception (i believe) among Americans, they think if these are talented one from India, then what about rest of people working in offshore! Fact is, Most often, the real work will be done by employee in India, and definitely each team will have at-least couple of high-skilled person, but these guys don't have email-communication/shoe-licking skills. They are honestly happy about this strict visa rules.