South Korean workers detained in Hyundai plant raid to be freed and flown home(nbcnews.com)
nbcnews.com
South Korean workers detained in Hyundai plant raid to be freed and flown home
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/south-korea-deal-workers-detained-hyundai-rcna229610
232 comments
What makes you confident they were acting illegally? Here's a US embassy:
> A B-1 visa may be granted to specialized workers going to the United States to install, service, or repair commercial or industrial equipment or machinery purchased from a company outside of the United States, or to train U.S. workers to perform such services.
https://es.usembassy.gov/visas/commercial-industrial-workers...
Many of those detained have been reported to be employed by Hyundai's equipment vendors. That would be consistent with activities of this nature.
It's probably a coin flip whether a different DHS staffer would agree, though. Interpretation of these rules has always been notoriously inconsistent, and probably explains the problem here.
> A B-1 visa may be granted to specialized workers going to the United States to install, service, or repair commercial or industrial equipment or machinery purchased from a company outside of the United States, or to train U.S. workers to perform such services.
https://es.usembassy.gov/visas/commercial-industrial-workers...
Many of those detained have been reported to be employed by Hyundai's equipment vendors. That would be consistent with activities of this nature.
It's probably a coin flip whether a different DHS staffer would agree, though. Interpretation of these rules has always been notoriously inconsistent, and probably explains the problem here.
It’s more exasperation at how ridiculous this process is, treating foreign labor like dangerous criminals by default.
[deleted]
How do you suggest we should treat foreign illegal labor?
In this case, give them and the company responsible a court summons?
Instead they detained all the Koreans in the building and appear to have used them as a negotiating chip in an upcoming “deal” with the government of South Korea. This is behavior we expect of a banana republic not an allied nation of laws.
Instead they detained all the Koreans in the building and appear to have used them as a negotiating chip in an upcoming “deal” with the government of South Korea. This is behavior we expect of a banana republic not an allied nation of laws.
Like people, maybe? What is the point of treating them like violent criminals other than to dehumanize them? Is it really any more effective than one guy reviewing the payroll and passing out fines until the issues are resolved?
Besides, they haven't been charged with anything so in the US they are considered innocent.
Besides, they haven't been charged with anything so in the US they are considered innocent.
Which is why they are being flown home. I see no dehumanizing going on. They were detained because they had no right to be in the country. You are putting a spin on
this that simply doesn't exist.
I'm frankly baffled. You have a large capitalist corporation, flouting the laws of the country they're in and exploiting cheap labour. The US are simply enforcing the law like you would expect from any non banana republic. I can't think of in issue where the left should be so aligned with the government. It's a scandal and i hope the executives get held to account.
I'm frankly baffled. You have a large capitalist corporation, flouting the laws of the country they're in and exploiting cheap labour. The US are simply enforcing the law like you would expect from any non banana republic. I can't think of in issue where the left should be so aligned with the government. It's a scandal and i hope the executives get held to account.
This is a malevolent interpretation.
They were in the country to transfer knowledge and help build a factory to create jobs in the US.
By mistake (maybe?), some visas expired, and then all workers are arrested.
Doesn't that seem like an exaggerated response? It's not like they don't respect the US laws and regulations…
They were in the country to transfer knowledge and help build a factory to create jobs in the US.
By mistake (maybe?), some visas expired, and then all workers are arrested.
Doesn't that seem like an exaggerated response? It's not like they don't respect the US laws and regulations…
Like the wage-slaves of dangerous criminals.
This is easy lol you go after the people benefitting from their labor.
Not like dangerous criminals. Not with white gloves. It isn't binary.
> amazing that theres so much sympathy towards giant Korean megacorp
At some level stories are told in a way in which there is a good-guy and a bad-guy and the megacorp drew the good-guy straw this time. It was just a few years ago a Hyundai owned subsidiary was caught in the US employing underage people from Guatemala [0].
0. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immi...
At some level stories are told in a way in which there is a good-guy and a bad-guy and the megacorp drew the good-guy straw this time. It was just a few years ago a Hyundai owned subsidiary was caught in the US employing underage people from Guatemala [0].
0. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immi...
When that happened, did they give the company a court date or did they raid the factory and detain the children? That’s the difference here.
The article insinuates an unannounced visit:
After Reuters documented the disappearance of the young girl who worked at SMART, a team of state and federal authorities conducted the Aug. 9 inspection at SL, in Alexander City. They discovered seven minors there, including the two Guatemalan brothers, among employees making lights and mirrors for Hyundai and Kia. Alabama’s Department of Labor fined SL and JK USA Inc, a staffing agency, $17,800 each.
After Reuters documented the disappearance of the young girl who worked at SMART, a team of state and federal authorities conducted the Aug. 9 inspection at SL, in Alexander City. They discovered seven minors there, including the two Guatemalan brothers, among employees making lights and mirrors for Hyundai and Kia. Alabama’s Department of Labor fined SL and JK USA Inc, a staffing agency, $17,800 each.
So it sounds like they gave them a fine and potentially a court date instead of taking hostages. That's my point.
Why would you give a court date to the company and allow hundreds of people who are presumably in the country illegally to remain free until said court date?
Don't pretend to not know the point. Rich executives and profiteers are the ones committing the actual crime. They're coordinating hundreds of people around with the express intent of using illegal labor to subvert local wages and workers' rights.
But every time one of these busts happen, no executives go to jail. They bust in, grab potentially hundreds of instances of those executives committing felonies, and pretend those working class people are the problem, quietly letting the execs giggle away to the bank. Often with a fee single digits percents of what they saved / made.
If there were 300 people here working illegally, I want to see multiple Hyundai executive charged with 300 counts of the associated felony crime.
But every time one of these busts happen, no executives go to jail. They bust in, grab potentially hundreds of instances of those executives committing felonies, and pretend those working class people are the problem, quietly letting the execs giggle away to the bank. Often with a fee single digits percents of what they saved / made.
If there were 300 people here working illegally, I want to see multiple Hyundai executive charged with 300 counts of the associated felony crime.
> Don't pretend to not know the point. Rich executives and profiteers are the ones committing the actual crime. They're coordinating hundreds of people around with the express intent of using illegal labor to subvert local wages and workers' rights.
Then charge them with the appropriate crime.
> But every time one of these busts happen, no executives go to jail. They bust in, grab potentially hundreds of instances of those executives committing felonies, and pretend those working class people are the problem, quietly letting the execs giggle away to the bank. Often with a fee single digits percents of what they saved / made.
Okay, then fix that instead of deciding to allow a bunch of people who are here illegally to remain because you're upset that other people aren't being charged.
> If there were 300 people here working illegally, I want to see multiple Hyundai executive charged with 300 counts of the associated felony crime.
Fine by me. Not sure why you're ranting at me about this tangent from the question I asked the parent poster.
Then charge them with the appropriate crime.
> But every time one of these busts happen, no executives go to jail. They bust in, grab potentially hundreds of instances of those executives committing felonies, and pretend those working class people are the problem, quietly letting the execs giggle away to the bank. Often with a fee single digits percents of what they saved / made.
Okay, then fix that instead of deciding to allow a bunch of people who are here illegally to remain because you're upset that other people aren't being charged.
> If there were 300 people here working illegally, I want to see multiple Hyundai executive charged with 300 counts of the associated felony crime.
Fine by me. Not sure why you're ranting at me about this tangent from the question I asked the parent poster.
People don't want to think about details, they just want to continue to hate on the other team and Hyuandi (and their contractors) doing something that would be illegal in just about every country on earth could interfere with that goal.
Around 90% of foreigner contractors that come to the USA to set up a factory or do maintenance on a factory are here under weird visa arrangements that the ICE would be able to poke holes in regardless. The right visa doesn’t exist, or impossible to obtain, so he Germans/swiss/japanese/koreans/taiwanese/and Chinese come here on visa waiver or simple B1 visas, or even tourist visas, to get the job the they need done out the way quickly (usually a few days or a week of work). The American visa system for short term work is simply messed up, and it’s much easier to get a visa to do the same thing in China than in the USA (surprise, guess where people decided to set up their factories?). America was really just wink/nudge before (we want you to setup a factory here! But no, we can’t really make the visa situation work out…you know what to do…), but now ICE needs to make their quotas and this is just an easy target for them.
The USA is just a bad place for foreign companies to setup factories: you need an army of immigration lawyers to do it, and be willing spending a lot of time waiting to get the “proper visas” for key personnel. South Korea’s interest in getting those engineers back isn’t just purely empathy based, there are probably only a handful of engineers in Korea that can do what they do (good luck getting that factory going before your term is out, Mr. Trump).
The USA is just a bad place for foreign companies to setup factories: you need an army of immigration lawyers to do it, and be willing spending a lot of time waiting to get the “proper visas” for key personnel. South Korea’s interest in getting those engineers back isn’t just purely empathy based, there are probably only a handful of engineers in Korea that can do what they do (good luck getting that factory going before your term is out, Mr. Trump).
> good luck getting that factory going before your term is out, Mr. Trump
That may well have been the goal in the first place.
That may well have been the goal in the first place.
Trump has always marketed these other countries investing in US manufacturing as a huge win, I doubt he is against this factory being built in a critical southern swing state.
[deleted]
I'm expecting this to be one of those American news stories where the public reaction is entirely dependent on the current party in power, right?
It feels weird for HN to be going to bat for a company abusing labor laws, am I missing something here?
It feels weird for HN to be going to bat for a company abusing labor laws, am I missing something here?
When the agency enforcing those labor laws is also blatantly violating the law while carrying out other highly publicized enforcement actions, they will be scrutinized for everything they do, including actions that were likely legal/necessary. That's part of the problem with the government breaking the law - legitimate actions are no longer seen as legitimate, because they have undermined themselves in the public eye.
I also don't think people are "going to bat for a company abusing labor laws" so much as they are highly suspicious of these enforcement actions given the complete lawlessness displayed elsewhere and imagine the possibility that there were more diplomatic solutions that still address the problem appropriately.
I also don't think people are "going to bat for a company abusing labor laws" so much as they are highly suspicious of these enforcement actions given the complete lawlessness displayed elsewhere and imagine the possibility that there were more diplomatic solutions that still address the problem appropriately.
I think the respective parties are consistently welcoming and hostile to immigrants regardless of who's in power, I don't really know what you mean. Biden would have been hated by the left for doing this.
People are so both-sides poisoned they come out with these nonsensical takes reflexively just to virtue signal being "above" having a (public) stance.
People are so both-sides poisoned they come out with these nonsensical takes reflexively just to virtue signal being "above" having a (public) stance.
I haven't been following the story closely, but it is clear the Korean workers broke visa rules? Or do they just look a bit foreign and talk funny?
Even before Trump there were plenty of stories where ICE clearly didn't know their own country's visa rules.
Even before Trump there were plenty of stories where ICE clearly didn't know their own country's visa rules.
The New York Times write-up on this is pretty good: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/us/georgia-battery-plant-.... This plant was under investigation for a significant time. Some citizens and workers with visas were initially detained, but were released once their documentation was verified. The workers being deported were not Hyundai employees, and it seems clear from the company's response that they were not working in the U.S. legally.
I can attest that’s companies, especially large ones will generally know the rules better than the various government agencies and people, precisely because they have an incentive to know, they pay people to know, and there is risk involved. They also usually make a determination that the reward is not only greater than the risk, but greater than the consequences, and they have always been proved correct in that calculation. That especially applies to the executives, the people who immensely profit and effectively never face any, let alone effective consequences, so peoples round them also just keep their heads down and look away or even just facilitate the illegal behaviors in order to brown nose and climb the corporate ladder.
It is somewhat astonishing, but it seems people are baffled when things don’t change even though consequences for corporations and executives are net positive. Why should they care when the c-suite runs off with way more money than before in the end anyways?
Take for example the recent greystar lawsuit by the government for essentially price fixing apartment rents, ie fraud, across the nation. Long story short; estimates are they profited about $2.2 billion every year, the government fined them/agreed to a measly settlement paid to the government; with zero relief or compensation to those they committed their crimes against, nor will the executives that made the illegal decisions suffer any consequences, nor will there be punitive consequences that make executives sit up in attention.
It is somewhat astonishing, but it seems people are baffled when things don’t change even though consequences for corporations and executives are net positive. Why should they care when the c-suite runs off with way more money than before in the end anyways?
Take for example the recent greystar lawsuit by the government for essentially price fixing apartment rents, ie fraud, across the nation. Long story short; estimates are they profited about $2.2 billion every year, the government fined them/agreed to a measly settlement paid to the government; with zero relief or compensation to those they committed their crimes against, nor will the executives that made the illegal decisions suffer any consequences, nor will there be punitive consequences that make executives sit up in attention.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend is a common underpinning of bad faith arguments.
It has been really disheartening seeing a generation of, presumably, leftists abandon decades old demands and movements from local worker protections, global environmental causes, or democratic oversight over ivy league institutes by parroting the same bad arguments their opposition did to them over these decades.
As long as I have been alive, very progressive leftists always argued that ivy league institutions need admission reform. They receive billions from our tax dollars, yet their admission policies have always favored the already wealthy and powerful (the rich, alumnus, donors, "elite"). They only pay lip service to "low income families" while straddling most middle class students in insane levels of debt and refuse to publish admission rates. Progressives have always argued that these organizations cannot exist without public (tax payers) funding and as a result should have democratic oversight and should be required to publish their admission rates. We should be withholding that funding or using it as a forcing function for them to do so. The opposition have always argued (in bad faith) to "leave them alone. Education should be independent and they should do whatever they want". Now that a right-wing administration actually put pressure on them (for reasons I disagree with), every "liberal" I know just jumps on the simplest of arguments that "They should be independent. There shouldn't be any oversight required or expected on these educational institutes. That's illegal.". Whats worst is trying to explain how this is a bad argument just gets you yelled at because you must be a "both sides are the same"-person or a secretly republican or "but we're not talking about admission here. We need to unit against the enemy with one argument then we'll figure it out later once education is not under attack" type BS arguments.
Same for tariffs and global trade rules and all the global environmental destruction, human rights violations, and local economy mayhem they caused. The argument isn't that these laws need to be tightened and reconsidered to reduce our dependency on slave labor or funding massive environmental polluters or not incentivizing the biggest consumer base on the plant to consider the diesel emissions cost of shipping massive contains full of plastic trinkets across the pacific only for 99% of them to end up in a landfill. Suddenly the argument from progressives and the left are all about the economy. The cost of TEMU for the poor American consumer and how this is the world we live in. There is nothing we can or should do to change it.
It has been really disheartening seeing a generation of, presumably, leftists abandon decades old demands and movements from local worker protections, global environmental causes, or democratic oversight over ivy league institutes by parroting the same bad arguments their opposition did to them over these decades.
As long as I have been alive, very progressive leftists always argued that ivy league institutions need admission reform. They receive billions from our tax dollars, yet their admission policies have always favored the already wealthy and powerful (the rich, alumnus, donors, "elite"). They only pay lip service to "low income families" while straddling most middle class students in insane levels of debt and refuse to publish admission rates. Progressives have always argued that these organizations cannot exist without public (tax payers) funding and as a result should have democratic oversight and should be required to publish their admission rates. We should be withholding that funding or using it as a forcing function for them to do so. The opposition have always argued (in bad faith) to "leave them alone. Education should be independent and they should do whatever they want". Now that a right-wing administration actually put pressure on them (for reasons I disagree with), every "liberal" I know just jumps on the simplest of arguments that "They should be independent. There shouldn't be any oversight required or expected on these educational institutes. That's illegal.". Whats worst is trying to explain how this is a bad argument just gets you yelled at because you must be a "both sides are the same"-person or a secretly republican or "but we're not talking about admission here. We need to unit against the enemy with one argument then we'll figure it out later once education is not under attack" type BS arguments.
Same for tariffs and global trade rules and all the global environmental destruction, human rights violations, and local economy mayhem they caused. The argument isn't that these laws need to be tightened and reconsidered to reduce our dependency on slave labor or funding massive environmental polluters or not incentivizing the biggest consumer base on the plant to consider the diesel emissions cost of shipping massive contains full of plastic trinkets across the pacific only for 99% of them to end up in a landfill. Suddenly the argument from progressives and the left are all about the economy. The cost of TEMU for the poor American consumer and how this is the world we live in. There is nothing we can or should do to change it.
How we do things matters. The rule of law and due process are important too, a strongman can’t just ignore those, muscle people around to their benefit, and pay lip service to leftist ideals to win over the left.
Ok.. not really sure what that has to do with what I said. I mentioned nothing about "how we do things". I was only referring to arguments we use for or against things. It's fine to disagree with an action because of "how they are/were done". It's an argument that has thorns of its own, but, again, has nothing to do with what I said.
Your argument seemed to boil down to leftists being against things they previously were for, with the implications it's because the right is supporting it. The way I see it that isn't what is happening. Liberals and leftists are alarmed at the rise of authoritarianism and the decay of the law.
None of what I mentioned has anything to do with the rise of authoritarianism nor the decay of law
Exactly, I am offering an alternative explanation for what you are observing than the explanation you provided.
I’m guessing they were here on a business/consulting visa and doing more than that but it’s probably been de facto practice for years and hasn’t had issues. And I’m guessing the majority of them have skills in setting a factory up that are difficult to source locally.
They were flown in under visas to help set up the plant as consultants (at least at one of the plants). I don't think they were intended to continue working there after. Some of the visas were also expired.
The article also says:
> LG Energy Solution said Saturday that 47 of its employees were detained, 46 of them Korean. Another 250 personnel from “equipment partner companies,” most of them Korean, were also being held, it added.
So it seems there were multiple parent companies involved
The article also says:
> LG Energy Solution said Saturday that 47 of its employees were detained, 46 of them Korean. Another 250 personnel from “equipment partner companies,” most of them Korean, were also being held, it added.
So it seems there were multiple parent companies involved
Yeah, it would take a while to train the locals to speak Korean.
Indeed. Likely just a pragmatic thing here that’s always worked. Will likely end up with a new special kind of very short term visa to cover this sort of thing.
Maybe your government is also jeopardizing FDI for some political grandstanding. Then no new visa is needed. Growth simply goes down and less people have health care. Problem solved
I sure hope not.
If they want to do business here, then they should be forced to hire here and train as needed and that includes teaching people their preferred ways of communicating.
If they want to do business here, then they should be forced to hire here and train as needed and that includes teaching people their preferred ways of communicating.
If we flipped that on US companies operating in Europe then there would be many cries of murder.
Specialist equipment require specialists to bring them up.
It’s a chicken and egg situation to put it mildly. If you had the people who could be trained to install and run this plant you wouldn’t be importing the entire factory.
It’s a chicken and egg situation to put it mildly. If you had the people who could be trained to install and run this plant you wouldn’t be importing the entire factory.
> If they want to do business here
Ok then they wont do business here.
Ok then they wont do business here.
Why, it’s like a 3 month consultancy thing not a full time role. I agree that locals should be hired for full time roles and that these guys went about it the wrong way, but previous administrations failed to enforce laws which created this de facto illegal situation.
They were LG Chem workers to set up the battery manufacturing plant at the Hyundai facility - the paperwork was not filed correctly - LG probably did this a few times already as practice - the workers are in a compound situation and don't interact with the locals.
Somebody snitched no doubt.
Somebody snitched no doubt.
Seems like the sort of thing our administration really wants to discourage, right? Definitely should deport those folks trying to... move manufacturing to America.
There's a Georgian TikTok user that is claimed snitching them. Heard also that she's running for office.
> the paperwork was not filed correctly
Is that an euphemism for "the paperwork was not filed AT ALL ON PURPOSE"?
Is that an euphemism for "the paperwork was not filed AT ALL ON PURPOSE"?
Do you have any information about this happening in the past, or the "compound situation" etc?
It is normal practice for workers brought in to start up a new production line.
Chinese workers come in and they barely speak English, and they are kept together at a hotel or at a rental home (compound) with a translator/minder and a local guide to make sure they don't wonder off on their own and get into sticky situations (kidnapped or law enforcement or unsanctioned visits to bars or the local girls).
Chinese workers come in and they barely speak English, and they are kept together at a hotel or at a rental home (compound) with a translator/minder and a local guide to make sure they don't wonder off on their own and get into sticky situations (kidnapped or law enforcement or unsanctioned visits to bars or the local girls).
And the so called “snitch” did a good job.
Isn't "freed and flown home" the same thing as "deported"? These were routine professionals doing a job they took in good faith under rules and norms that have held for a century or more.
>Federal and immigration agents arrested 475 people on Thursday — mostly South Korean nationals — while executing a judicial search warrant as part of a criminal investigation into alleged unlawful employment at the facility.
> ...
>South Korea will “push forward measures to review and improve the residency status and visa system for personnel travelling to the United States.”
The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there.
> ...
>South Korea will “push forward measures to review and improve the residency status and visa system for personnel travelling to the United States.”
The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there.
> The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there.
No one ever does, by that standard. In the US, if you're a professional coming in to do some short-term thing, there's no visa process. You just fly in and get the stamp in your passport, which is technically treated as a "waiver of visa". Then you do your job and go home.
Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"?
No one ever does, by that standard. In the US, if you're a professional coming in to do some short-term thing, there's no visa process. You just fly in and get the stamp in your passport, which is technically treated as a "waiver of visa". Then you do your job and go home.
Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"?
>Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"?
Something tells me that working at a factory, even for "training" purposes is very different than attending a conference. Wikipedia confirms this:
>There are restrictions on the type of employment-related activities allowed. Meetings and conferences in relation to the travelers' profession, line of business or employer in their home country are generally acceptable, but most forms of "gainful employment" are not. There are however poorly-classifiable exceptions such as persons performing professional services in the United States for a non-U.S. employer, and persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale.[26] Performers (such as actors and musicians) who plan on performing live or taping scenes for productions in their country of origin, as well as athletes participating in an athletic event, are likewise not allowed to use the VWP for their respective engagements and are instead required to have an O or P visa prior to arrival. Foreign media representatives and journalists on assignment are required to have a nonimmigrant media (I) visa.[27]
Something tells me that working at a factory, even for "training" purposes is very different than attending a conference. Wikipedia confirms this:
>There are restrictions on the type of employment-related activities allowed. Meetings and conferences in relation to the travelers' profession, line of business or employer in their home country are generally acceptable, but most forms of "gainful employment" are not. There are however poorly-classifiable exceptions such as persons performing professional services in the United States for a non-U.S. employer, and persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale.[26] Performers (such as actors and musicians) who plan on performing live or taping scenes for productions in their country of origin, as well as athletes participating in an athletic event, are likewise not allowed to use the VWP for their respective engagements and are instead required to have an O or P visa prior to arrival. Foreign media representatives and journalists on assignment are required to have a nonimmigrant media (I) visa.[27]
Even within the US, there's been something of a crackdown on out-of-state work from a tax perspective. Though it has been pretty inconsistent from what I've seen even if companies are starting to use auditors to track via expense reports--though, somewhat weirdly, they don't always follow state laws that are often set up around professional athletes and entertainers. Obviously most people have a right to work out-of-state but they may have to file appropriate tax returns.
> Obviously most people have a right to work out-of-state but they may have to file appropriate tax returns.
Which US resident would not have the right to work wherever they want in the US?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit...
Which US resident would not have the right to work wherever they want in the US?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit...
Working out-of-state is different from freedom of movement.
For example, if you live in New Jersey and work in New York you are obligated to file tax returns to both states.
See also the "Jock tax", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jock_tax, "the jock tax is the colloquially named income tax levied against visitors to a city or state who earn money in that jurisdiction".
For example, if you live in New Jersey and work in New York you are obligated to file tax returns to both states.
See also the "Jock tax", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jock_tax, "the jock tax is the colloquially named income tax levied against visitors to a city or state who earn money in that jurisdiction".
>Working out-of-state is different from freedom of movement.
It is the same in the US. I do not see how having to pay taxes prevents anyone from working in a place.
Tax policy and the legal right to work somewhere are two different things. As far as I know, no non-federal jurisdiction in the US can officially say people of xyz characteristics cannot work here. At least not yet.
Also, the jock tax is just income tax.
The only reason it has a name is because it is more difficult to audit and prove tax evasion for most other people that work in various locales, but do not pay income tax they are legally required to, whereas the public nature of the work of entertainers and large incomes makes it easy for a government to prove tax was owed. Which the wikipedia link says:
>Since a state cannot afford to track the many individuals who do business on an itinerant basis, the ones targeted are usually high profile and very wealthy, namely professional athletes. Not only are the working schedules of famous sports players public, so are their salaries. The state can compute and collect the amount with very little investment of time and effort.
It is the same in the US. I do not see how having to pay taxes prevents anyone from working in a place.
Tax policy and the legal right to work somewhere are two different things. As far as I know, no non-federal jurisdiction in the US can officially say people of xyz characteristics cannot work here. At least not yet.
Also, the jock tax is just income tax.
The only reason it has a name is because it is more difficult to audit and prove tax evasion for most other people that work in various locales, but do not pay income tax they are legally required to, whereas the public nature of the work of entertainers and large incomes makes it easy for a government to prove tax was owed. Which the wikipedia link says:
>Since a state cannot afford to track the many individuals who do business on an itinerant basis, the ones targeted are usually high profile and very wealthy, namely professional athletes. Not only are the working schedules of famous sports players public, so are their salaries. The state can compute and collect the amount with very little investment of time and effort.
Absolutely nothing prevents anyone from working in a place. I don't see anyone in this thread saying otherwise.
ghaff's comment - the one you replied to - included "there's been something of a crackdown on out-of-state work from a tax perspective".
As you correctly point out, that's a different thing than the right to work somewhere.
ghaff's comment - the one you replied to - included "there's been something of a crackdown on out-of-state work from a tax perspective".
As you correctly point out, that's a different thing than the right to work somewhere.
> I don't see anyone in this thread saying otherwise.
ghaff wrote:
> most people have a right to work out-of-state
Which means some people do not. I was interested in who that would be.
ghaff wrote:
> most people have a right to work out-of-state
Which means some people do not. I was interested in who that would be.
There may be state-related licensure requirements. Smaller companies, especially, may not be set up to have the legal provisions in place to handle employees living in all states.
There may be other things but I'm not an employment lawyer. So people can move but they may not continue to be employed across state lines.
Yes, in many cases, people can commute across state lines to do their actual work. But the companies often still need a legal entity in that person's state to pay them. I'll leave aside edge cases related to custodial matters and so forth.
There may be other things but I'm not an employment lawyer. So people can move but they may not continue to be employed across state lines.
Yes, in many cases, people can commute across state lines to do their actual work. But the companies often still need a legal entity in that person's state to pay them. I'll leave aside edge cases related to custodial matters and so forth.
I don't know. Weasel word :-) I could hypothesize court orders for whatever reason.
> Something tells me that working at a factory, even for "training" purposes is very different than attending a conference.
Building a factory as part of a multi-billion investment.
Is the administration serious about re-industrialization? If they are, then if they find visa discrepancies of foreign nationals to that, perhaps they should help the foreigners sort out the discrepancies so they can continue to help the administration achieve its goals.
Building a factory as part of a multi-billion investment.
Is the administration serious about re-industrialization? If they are, then if they find visa discrepancies of foreign nationals to that, perhaps they should help the foreigners sort out the discrepancies so they can continue to help the administration achieve its goals.
In this particular administration there is no coherence, so one hand will wreck what the other is trying to build.
It was a factory under construction. While, sure, the law is ambiguous (which is the whole point of having "norms" like this in the first place), surely you'd agree that their work falls under "persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale."
I just can't understand how anyone thinks that a "Surprise! You're in jail now!" change of enforcement norms like this is a good thing.
I just can't understand how anyone thinks that a "Surprise! You're in jail now!" change of enforcement norms like this is a good thing.
>It was a factory under construction. [...] surely you'd agree that their work falls under "persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale."
I can't tell whether you actually think the factory was under construction and therefore the exemption you mentioned would apply, or are trying to mislead people with some sneaky wording (ie. that it was under construction at some point). In any case according to wikipedia[1] it was constructed between 2022-2024, and "full production" (of cars, presumably) began in October 2024, almost a year ago. By all accounts it wasn't "under construction".
That said, I'm sure that something as complicated as a car factory would be continually upgraded and repaired, and maybe some of that would fall under "installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale", but at the same time that shouldn't be used as an excuse for multinationals to import arbitrary amount of foreign workers to work there, bypassing the normal visa process. Moreover it's questionable whether that "installing..." excuse would even hold. The OP article mentioned that over 400 workers, mostly south korean nationals were arrested in the raids, but another source[2] suggests the factory's employment is around 400 people. If it was really installing equipment, I'd expect it to be 5-10% of the factory's workforce, not 50-100%.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Motor_Group_Metaplant_...
[2] https://georgia.org/press-release/hyundai-supplier-pha-creat...
I can't tell whether you actually think the factory was under construction and therefore the exemption you mentioned would apply, or are trying to mislead people with some sneaky wording (ie. that it was under construction at some point). In any case according to wikipedia[1] it was constructed between 2022-2024, and "full production" (of cars, presumably) began in October 2024, almost a year ago. By all accounts it wasn't "under construction".
That said, I'm sure that something as complicated as a car factory would be continually upgraded and repaired, and maybe some of that would fall under "installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale", but at the same time that shouldn't be used as an excuse for multinationals to import arbitrary amount of foreign workers to work there, bypassing the normal visa process. Moreover it's questionable whether that "installing..." excuse would even hold. The OP article mentioned that over 400 workers, mostly south korean nationals were arrested in the raids, but another source[2] suggests the factory's employment is around 400 people. If it was really installing equipment, I'd expect it to be 5-10% of the factory's workforce, not 50-100%.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Motor_Group_Metaplant_...
[2] https://georgia.org/press-release/hyundai-supplier-pha-creat...
> In any case according to wikipedia[1] it was constructed between 2022-2024, and "full production" (of cars, presumably) began in October 2024, almost a year ago. By all accounts it wasn't "under construction".
As someone who has worked in IT for a few decades, I have had to go 'into production' with services while things still needed to be, and were still being, built out.
Factories are large and complex: just because one part has been deployed doesn't mean another part has. One simple possibility: they went 'into production' being able to produce X units per week, but work was being done to be able to expand to X+30% units.
As someone who has worked in IT for a few decades, I have had to go 'into production' with services while things still needed to be, and were still being, built out.
Factories are large and complex: just because one part has been deployed doesn't mean another part has. One simple possibility: they went 'into production' being able to produce X units per week, but work was being done to be able to expand to X+30% units.
The car factory has been done for a while. What was being fitted out was a new LG battery factory next to it.
Technically almost every white collar business traveler is working in the US illegally if you strictly apply the letter of the law. Let’s say you come here for two days of meetings and you are coding or doing some analysis on the third day before you fly home. You’ve now violated your business visa. The Trump administration can start enforcing the law like that and we’ll be even more screwed, because absolutely no non-US company will build anything if business travel to help spin up the office or plant is practically impossible.
And the same in other places. I’ve traveled to Europe many times without a work visa. I go to meetings, talk yo people and yes, write a bit of code. It’s what everyone does.
Unless you're being paid a US wage by a US company this is practically impossible to discover, other than by raiding the office/factory like they did at Hyundai.
Technically they can raid any big tech company and I’m sure they’ll find some business travelers that are working between meetings.
That is not true.
There is a process, it's usually tedious but it exists. I did it for Singapore, the US and Israel. They mostly took multiple months but I never wanted to take any chances. For the US it was a "B-1 in lieu of H-1B" visa for example.
Attending a conference is something different than what these workers did. There are rules around what a "business trip" is and what is not and what "work" is.
There is a process, it's usually tedious but it exists. I did it for Singapore, the US and Israel. They mostly took multiple months but I never wanted to take any chances. For the US it was a "B-1 in lieu of H-1B" visa for example.
Attending a conference is something different than what these workers did. There are rules around what a "business trip" is and what is not and what "work" is.
There are visa types specifically created for this sort of situation (e.g. E2 visas). But those visas are only available to certain nationals and South Koreans are not among them, which is very stupid given the strong commercial and strategic ties between the USA and South Korea.
> Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing.
I flew to an expo where our company had a booth and the US border patrol took me aside and started asking if I'd be selling things there or working at the booth in some other form. I told them that I am a tech going to see other companies' stuff. They then discussed something between themselves for 10 minutes and let me pass. This was 20 years ago, so them being picky is certainly not a new thing.
I flew to an expo where our company had a booth and the US border patrol took me aside and started asking if I'd be selling things there or working at the booth in some other form. I told them that I am a tech going to see other companies' stuff. They then discussed something between themselves for 10 minutes and let me pass. This was 20 years ago, so them being picky is certainly not a new thing.
When there were custom forms everyone had to fill out, as I recall, one of the questions was whether you had samples or goods for sale (or something like that). Priorities have probably shifted but direct commercial activities probably remain a concern even in countries that generally have no issue with you attending a conference or meeting with customers.
The fact that something normal, we need to happen as a country, is ambiguous and sparks a 10 minute discussion is the big red flag. Immigration and business visits need to be clear and quick. We need naive immigration reform.
US needs immigration reform bad but problem is you have two competing sides. Plenty of companies want to bring in cheaper/visa tied workers and US workers who want to protect their wages. Few voters have any faith in politicians to not completely screw over average American.
And apparently many Americans lack confidence in their own ability to perform better than people who barely speak the local language whose supervisor they could become.
I’m guessing they were doing that or similar but doing more than is scoped for that. And everyone has probably been doing this for a long time for short term specialist tasks, so it’s industry practice now.
This administration is taking people who dutifully show up for court hearings as part of their asylum claims and shipping them back to their country of origin.
To make it worse, they are sending their confidential asylum paperwork to the country directly.
The South Koreans are lucky they are being sent to the correct Korea.
To make it worse, they are sending their confidential asylum paperwork to the country directly.
The South Koreans are lucky they are being sent to the correct Korea.
"Deported" now seems to be an euphemism for being sent to a concentration camp in a random third world country, so I guess they have to use different language for actual deportations.
The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed.
This isn't exactly new territory. A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.
This isn't exactly new territory. A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.
As a tech person, I've never had trouble entering Europe from the US to go to a conference or whatever but I'd be very careful with respect to honorariums or expenses being covered for speaking, etc., which I have heard of people getting in trouble over. (Of course, some countries do have explicit requirements for business-related visits.)
Every country is careful with rules like that. The main difference is the US has been the #1 destination for almost everyone in the world to work/live for decades, so it's a major supply/demand issue that border guards have to deal with. People often compare it to European countries. Random countries that are people's 15th choice to immigrate, where they don't need to try as hard with enforcement. Or at least didn't until recently, since Europe also began experiencing American-southern border style immigration issues.
> The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed.
Because there is no visa process for short term professional work in the US, and never has been.
> A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.
That's just wrong. Virtually the entirety of the professional world travels around between industrial countries on tourist visas. Otherwise anyone going to a trade show is an "illegal" at risk of deportation.
Because there is no visa process for short term professional work in the US, and never has been.
> A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.
That's just wrong. Virtually the entirety of the professional world travels around between industrial countries on tourist visas. Otherwise anyone going to a trade show is an "illegal" at risk of deportation.
There's work and work. Most "tourist" visa will cover things like attending conferences or tradeshows, meetings with a different branch of your employer or customers etc, but on the other side more dedicated work, conference talks you are compensated for, ... can quickly be treated differently.
And if you don't come from a preferred part of the world even the former can quickly be quite a process to prove it.
And if you don't come from a preferred part of the world even the former can quickly be quite a process to prove it.
Exactly. Being nervous, of a "suspicious" ethnicity, giving any indication that you're being paid for being in the country, can probably all lead to issues. As I wrote elsewhere, aside from some countries that require a visa for any explicit business activity, a basic visa is typically fine to go to a conference or meet with a customer, much less send some emails.
That is my impression of travelling to the US right now. Non zero risk of baseless detainment and deportation, and a non zero risk of being sent to a different country than the one you live in.
No thanks. I'll stream the conference online.
No thanks. I'll stream the conference online.
South Koreans, like most developed countries, get an automatic 90 day B-1 "visa waiver" visa when entering.
some had no visas, some had tourist visas, some had expired visas
Well this extra context makes what ICE did totally understandable. I would expect any country to do the same.
The crackdown is certainly being done for the wrong reasons but it does seem strange to me just how much of the US is built around the idea of a second class of citizens who don't have documentation. It seems like a significant portion of farmworkers, construction, hospitality and childcare are routinely done by people who aren't legally in the country.
I'm sure there is more of this than in Europe than I'm aware of (food delivery is one example we're recently had a lot of focus on in the UK) but it's certainly not at the point that it's routine and expected.
How does this work? Are these people somehow paying taxes regardless of their immigration status?
I'm sure there is more of this than in Europe than I'm aware of (food delivery is one example we're recently had a lot of focus on in the UK) but it's certainly not at the point that it's routine and expected.
How does this work? Are these people somehow paying taxes regardless of their immigration status?
> How does this work? Are these people somehow paying taxes regardless of their immigration status?
Some jobs are cash jobs, the employer doesn't report the income and the employee likely doesn't either, this isn't legal for the employer or the employee, but enforcement is uneven.
For jobs with proper payroll, income reporting and employment tax withholding, it's common to 'borrow' someone else's tax id. That's not legal either of course, although the employer may be ok if they were reasonably unaware of the borrowing. If the borrowed tax id is only used for work by one person, and the withholding is close to correct (or a tax return is filed for that tax id), then taxes are being paid properly, even if they're attributed incorrectly. If the tax id is used by multiple people, then the combined income might be subject to a larger tax than if earned by multiple tax ids, and withholding is likely to be iffy (withholding tables are built around a single job).
I think I've heard of ways for someone without work authorization to get their own tax idea so they can have make properly attributed tax payments, but I don't remember the details.
Some jobs are cash jobs, the employer doesn't report the income and the employee likely doesn't either, this isn't legal for the employer or the employee, but enforcement is uneven.
For jobs with proper payroll, income reporting and employment tax withholding, it's common to 'borrow' someone else's tax id. That's not legal either of course, although the employer may be ok if they were reasonably unaware of the borrowing. If the borrowed tax id is only used for work by one person, and the withholding is close to correct (or a tax return is filed for that tax id), then taxes are being paid properly, even if they're attributed incorrectly. If the tax id is used by multiple people, then the combined income might be subject to a larger tax than if earned by multiple tax ids, and withholding is likely to be iffy (withholding tables are built around a single job).
I think I've heard of ways for someone without work authorization to get their own tax idea so they can have make properly attributed tax payments, but I don't remember the details.
Your questions are valid however diverges from the main point. The South Korean citizens in question were breaking the law. Whether we agree on ICE’s approach and how that reflects on optics is more of a political question for this administration. Clearly, the South Korean citizens were not following established US Visa Law and Policy.
That is simply not true. Automatic/assumed visa waivers has been the way international professionals do temporary work in the US for many decades. Yes, the state department and DHS after it have always had the ability to revoke this waiver when abused. But there is simply no abuse alleged here. They showed up to build a factory, made no attempt to hide that fact, and that's exactly what they were "caught" doing.
This "Yooz Brok Duh Lah" absolutism is a transparently political excuse for what is very obviously a norm-breaking and unjust enforcement of a law that was working very well.
This "Yooz Brok Duh Lah" absolutism is a transparently political excuse for what is very obviously a norm-breaking and unjust enforcement of a law that was working very well.
I think the premise is off. DHS said some detainees were on the Visa Waiver Program, which only permits business visits and forbids employment. Others were on B-1, which covers meetings or limited training but not factory construction. DHS also mentioned expired or improper visas. We do not have a full manifest, so some roles may have been lawful, but the evidence presented so far shows that at least some of those detained were not following the rules of their visa.
As a reasonably impartial observer, I think the truth here is somewhere in the middle. Like almost any large American factory, there are going to be some handful of people who are illegal immigrants through some means or other (if I understand correctly they had a warrant for 4 Latina people). Sweeping up anyone there who didn't have an iron clad visa, I imagine that was just a political play.
There's been a successive series of US federal administrations that gave them a pass, either through lack of enforcement or inventing temporary work visas that also covered people who already illegally immigrated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protected_status Biden expanded this authority to cover ~1.2M new people
Also in states like California they let undocumented immigrants get drivers licenses. They can even get bank accounts and mortgages in some states (which is basically impossible here in Canada).
Also in states like California they let undocumented immigrants get drivers licenses. They can even get bank accounts and mortgages in some states (which is basically impossible here in Canada).
They still need to prove residency. They also cannot vote, and this is not a legal status: just the right to drive
Yes but the topic wasn't about voting?
OP was asking how there's huge communities of undocumented people in the US and how they manage to work and live without legal status. Which would be an unusual thing in almost any country. The logistics of doing so is a valid question (how do you drive to work, how do you find housing, how do you get healthcare, etc). The answer is many state and federal policies support having millions of undocumented people in legal limbo indefinitely, by offering them pseudo-legal status or loopholes.
OP was asking how there's huge communities of undocumented people in the US and how they manage to work and live without legal status. Which would be an unusual thing in almost any country. The logistics of doing so is a valid question (how do you drive to work, how do you find housing, how do you get healthcare, etc). The answer is many state and federal policies support having millions of undocumented people in legal limbo indefinitely, by offering them pseudo-legal status or loopholes.
I don't quite understand what happened other than "deported by ICE".
The article makes it sound as if there were govt negotiations to have them sent home. It is light on details though, but with that many people of a friendly nation / corporation I imagine they get treated differently.
I interpreted that to mean they may not have permanent US immigration issues vs "being deported".
I interpreted that to mean they may not have permanent US immigration issues vs "being deported".
the national debate and evolving policies wrt deportations the past year has focused on:
1. getting those with criminal records depoarted and not allowed back (a fair number of whom have been depoted and have violated the ban on returning)
2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and giving them cash stipends and not barring their reentry in the future
These Koreans who came to Georgia on behalf of their company will probably not have their tickets paid for by the US nor get the stipend, so yes, they are treated differently as you suggest.
after the surprise arrests executing the judicial warrant, the Korean company and government stepped forward and expressed a commitment to helping these workers, which occurred without negotiation, although you could call the flurry of phone calls after that negotiations, it was probably more like "Q; what do we need to do" "A: you need to bring them home". neither country nor the companies involved is looking to disturb relations, though perhaps this is adjacent to a tariff negotiation.
1. getting those with criminal records depoarted and not allowed back (a fair number of whom have been depoted and have violated the ban on returning)
2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and giving them cash stipends and not barring their reentry in the future
These Koreans who came to Georgia on behalf of their company will probably not have their tickets paid for by the US nor get the stipend, so yes, they are treated differently as you suggest.
after the surprise arrests executing the judicial warrant, the Korean company and government stepped forward and expressed a commitment to helping these workers, which occurred without negotiation, although you could call the flurry of phone calls after that negotiations, it was probably more like "Q; what do we need to do" "A: you need to bring them home". neither country nor the companies involved is looking to disturb relations, though perhaps this is adjacent to a tariff negotiation.
> neither country nor the companies involved is looking to disturb relations
Relations are disturbed. You can take that to the bank. The SK government just stepped up for their citizens as they should. But US/SK relations just got dinged.
Relations are disturbed. You can take that to the bank. The SK government just stepped up for their citizens as they should. But US/SK relations just got dinged.
i didn't say neither country wanted to control its borders, visas, employment etc, but that's all consular stuff or domestic/border policing.
at the ambassaor/embassy/diplomatic level state to state, there will be no effect on relations because neither country wants that. We are important allies and major trading partners, this is a matter of minor corruption.
you're smarter than this, don't read/comment selectively to stay on your hobby horses. this does not bring us closer to the inevitable contradictions of capitalism and the revolution.
at the ambassaor/embassy/diplomatic level state to state, there will be no effect on relations because neither country wants that. We are important allies and major trading partners, this is a matter of minor corruption.
you're smarter than this, don't read/comment selectively to stay on your hobby horses. this does not bring us closer to the inevitable contradictions of capitalism and the revolution.
Most of the conflict occurs when the country of origin refuses to accept the deportees, for whatever reason. I don't imagine this will be the case with South Korea.
> 2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and not barring their reentry in the future
If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet, I have a very large bridge to sell you.
If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet, I have a very large bridge to sell you.
it's a real policy (it's an app), provide a link if you have a source that says it's not, otherwise you're just unproductively snarking. it's certainly cost effective, a few thousand voluntary is much cheaper than administrative means.
I have friends who've been deported without criminal records. They didn't get paid anything. I don't know what you're talking about.
I'll repeat what I said:
> If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet
What policy or app says "when ICE deports people, give them a stipend" ?
Edit: Here's the ICE manual on how deportations are conducted[1]. There's no mention of cash payouts.
[1] https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofie...
I'll repeat what I said:
> If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet
What policy or app says "when ICE deports people, give them a stipend" ?
Edit: Here's the ICE manual on how deportations are conducted[1]. There's no mention of cash payouts.
[1] https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofie...
as I said before, the program is to volunteer to go home prior to being deported by the govt; the point is by volunteering you save the cost of deportation (agents, lawyers, court time, incarceration, transportation)
so if your friends were deported before applying, then it's too late because that deportation already cost the govt money.
the program is only months old, so if your friends got deported before that it wouldn't apply.
you have to apply for the program (I think you just download the app and sign up) in advance, you can't just return home and then apply.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-t...
https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation
so if your friends were deported before applying, then it's too late because that deportation already cost the govt money.
the program is only months old, so if your friends got deported before that it wouldn't apply.
you have to apply for the program (I think you just download the app and sign up) in advance, you can't just return home and then apply.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-t...
https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation
Interesting. I missed this. Thanks.
"Deported" has several meanings, especially in recent context for deportees from the USA. One can be deported to a detention facility in a country one has no ties to, for example. This unfortunately has happened often enough that it is important to distinguish exactly which flavor of deportation is happening...
[deleted]
Before IIRIRA in 1996, US immigration law had separate processes for deportation and exclusion. Since then, we have a single, unified process called removal. So technically deportation no longer exists. It is more proper to say that someone is being removed.
Yes, but it still seems like relatively good news for temporary workers who have a home in a safe country to go back to. We’re not talking about Haiti.
It's a bit different since they "srlf-deport" before the government formally deport them. That mean they are not banned from coming to the US next time.
rayiner(5)
For people saying "they should have had the right visa", no one does this.
Any day of the week all of the big tech companies will have dozens of overseas engineers in the US attending meetings, and gasp working on-site (writing code, etc). They all have either tourist visas or visa waivers.
And it's the same thing when the US engineers visit the remote sites in other countries.
Regardless of what the letter of the law is, this has long been the practice, because it's the only workable solution and is clearly within the spirit of the law.
In this case LG was fitting out a new batter factory. That is a very complex setup with highly specialized machines. The ONLY way that was ever going to happen was with LG specialists coming over to do the setup and get the line working. And it's almost certain that getting "correct" visas for all these people would have been practically impossible, and has not been the actual practice for many decades.
Any day of the week all of the big tech companies will have dozens of overseas engineers in the US attending meetings, and gasp working on-site (writing code, etc). They all have either tourist visas or visa waivers.
And it's the same thing when the US engineers visit the remote sites in other countries.
Regardless of what the letter of the law is, this has long been the practice, because it's the only workable solution and is clearly within the spirit of the law.
In this case LG was fitting out a new batter factory. That is a very complex setup with highly specialized machines. The ONLY way that was ever going to happen was with LG specialists coming over to do the setup and get the line working. And it's almost certain that getting "correct" visas for all these people would have been practically impossible, and has not been the actual practice for many decades.
What you are describing - going to a remote site, sort out something with client and going back - is a business meeting and that falls under visa waiver / tourist visa in any country, because the worker who is doing the job is not paid by the local company, but by his employer in his home country.
With this logic it would be illegal to have a vacation and also write a code in a free time.
With this logic it would be illegal to have a vacation and also write a code in a free time.
Ianal but my understanding is you can’t do any work , even coding, debugging, if you are in the us on a non work visa.
It does not matter who is funding you.
I could be wrong though. I have personally seen companies abuse this. I’m glad it’s be cracked down on.
It does not matter who is funding you.
I could be wrong though. I have personally seen companies abuse this. I’m glad it’s be cracked down on.
I agree, it's probably the law (not just in the US, but most places). But, IME, it's almost universally ignored, and has to be.
I've never worked in fab/manufacturing, but I assume if you buy a bunch of gear from ASML (100s of millions of $), they are going to send a team out to help set it up and get it working for you. How else could that work? Some story for advanced batteries.
And a similar story for large (multi-national) tech/software companies. People need to travel back and forth between sites. Getting "work" visas for these short visits would be impractical.
Why are you happy to see a crack down? How do you think this should work?
I've never worked in fab/manufacturing, but I assume if you buy a bunch of gear from ASML (100s of millions of $), they are going to send a team out to help set it up and get it working for you. How else could that work? Some story for advanced batteries.
And a similar story for large (multi-national) tech/software companies. People need to travel back and forth between sites. Getting "work" visas for these short visits would be impractical.
Why are you happy to see a crack down? How do you think this should work?
There is nothing impractical about getting a business visa, in fact it's the same process as getting a tourist visa and some consulates issue just a generic B-1/2 visa, which can be either, depending on the purpose of your visit. And these visas are usually multi-entry, so you don't need to get one for every visit. Same for visa waiver - it can be used for either business or tourism, you just need to declare the purpose.
The problem in the topical case, is likely, that it was not a short visit but people being employed in the US illegally.
The problem in the topical case, is likely, that it was not a short visit but people being employed in the US illegally.
The solution is to hire and train people inside the country. To build the knowledge base and skills within the country.
I totally understand that it is universally abused. I’ve seen it abused in white collar work. Companies need to adjust economically and plan their budgets accordingly.
Honestly, in many parts of the country there is no hope, no jobs, and just drugs. It’s time to invest in the U.S. citizen again.
I’m happy there is a crackdown because I have seen U.S. jobs lost due to this behavior. It’s actually the only reason I voted for trump.
I totally understand that it is universally abused. I’ve seen it abused in white collar work. Companies need to adjust economically and plan their budgets accordingly.
Honestly, in many parts of the country there is no hope, no jobs, and just drugs. It’s time to invest in the U.S. citizen again.
I’m happy there is a crackdown because I have seen U.S. jobs lost due to this behavior. It’s actually the only reason I voted for trump.
In terms of very long term policy, you could try to train people to be able to do this. But, for advanced industrial processes (eg batteries) the way to do that is to establish a bunch of production lines. And that will NEVER happen in the US today without bringing in overseas experts to spend months starting them up.
Sure, but bring them over on the proper visa! Have them train — not compete against the U.S. worker on wages!
There is no practical visa to get. If they had to follow the letter of the law there would be no plant. They are not competing against US workers, there are no US workers to do the job.
And, FWIW, when I worked for big multi-national tech firms, it was the same thing having people from the EU offices visit. They were not doing jobs that Americans could do. We already hired all the Americans we could, and these people worked 50 weeks a year in the EU.
And, FWIW, when I worked for big multi-national tech firms, it was the same thing having people from the EU offices visit. They were not doing jobs that Americans could do. We already hired all the Americans we could, and these people worked 50 weeks a year in the EU.
There are plenty of diverse visas available. Arguing that specific visa is not available and therefore you do not have to follow the law is not an argument I can follow. In my mind that is tantamount to fraud.
America is a very large country and I’m sure if you paid enough, and took the time to train the workers you can find people to do the work. If you have planned your budget and timeline around not taking this path then it seems unethical to me.
I’ve witnessed tech jobs done where there are plenty of capable people in the us available to do the work. They just cannot afford to post us wages and train the workers in the us.
I completely understand that some projects are different, and you need a specific skillset. But if you are going to do work on us soil you have to follow the law.
America is a very large country and I’m sure if you paid enough, and took the time to train the workers you can find people to do the work. If you have planned your budget and timeline around not taking this path then it seems unethical to me.
I’ve witnessed tech jobs done where there are plenty of capable people in the us available to do the work. They just cannot afford to post us wages and train the workers in the us.
I completely understand that some projects are different, and you need a specific skillset. But if you are going to do work on us soil you have to follow the law.
And I've interviewed many many hundreds of people for jobs at big tech companies, and there is no easy source of US people to fill these jobs. The non-US people brought over to fill them, and the people hired in overseas offices were dramatically better qualified than the US people we declined to hire.
I've also experienced this, and I completely agree. The reality is that you have to pay a very high salary in the US if you want someone to do a very good job. You probably have to recruit from the top universities, or the top candidate from other universities. Also, for a fraction of a US salary you can hire the very best bands in other countries, which is obviously a logical decision for any company to make.
That does not, however, excuse anyone from following the law.
I could be wrong, but the intent of the law is to encourage companies to train candidates to make them ready for the job. If you are just bringing in workers from other countries to work on us soil, even though there are us workers that can you do the job, in my mind you are essentially circumventing the intent of the law. This weakens the country for everyone.
Part of the problem right now with regards to skills is that there is essentially a threshold that has been crossed for outsourcing where the skills are just more prevalent in other countries. That's obviously not a great look for the United States.
That does not, however, excuse anyone from following the law.
I could be wrong, but the intent of the law is to encourage companies to train candidates to make them ready for the job. If you are just bringing in workers from other countries to work on us soil, even though there are us workers that can you do the job, in my mind you are essentially circumventing the intent of the law. This weakens the country for everyone.
Part of the problem right now with regards to skills is that there is essentially a threshold that has been crossed for outsourcing where the skills are just more prevalent in other countries. That's obviously not a great look for the United States.
Not surprising, but since when is something being hard or expensive a valid excuse to break the law?
[deleted]
https://apnews.com/article/south-korea-us-georgia-raid-hyund...
The battery plant is not up and running :).
The battery plant is not up and running :).
> freed and flown home
thats called _deported_
thats called _deported_
I like how the blame for everything gets deflected to the contracting company. Like Hyundai had no idea what was going on.
Similar things happen with stuff like workplace safety. "Shouldn't that guy be strapped into that lift?" No, he's with xxxx, they don't follow any rules. You can turn them in but nobody cares.
Similar things happen with stuff like workplace safety. "Shouldn't that guy be strapped into that lift?" No, he's with xxxx, they don't follow any rules. You can turn them in but nobody cares.
It’s a language issue.
When I first started travelling to the US, I was carefully coached by US HR and Legal to say I was on “business” as in meetings, and not “work.”
I suspect the subtle difference was not understood by the Koreans.
A shoddy way and shortsighted to deal with companies which are investing in your country.
When I first started travelling to the US, I was carefully coached by US HR and Legal to say I was on “business” as in meetings, and not “work.”
I suspect the subtle difference was not understood by the Koreans.
A shoddy way and shortsighted to deal with companies which are investing in your country.
> I suspect the subtle difference was not understood by the Koreans.
Why would you suspect that a company flying in hundreds of laborers can’t afford a lawyer to give the same guidance your HR company gave? It’s tax evasion and cost cutting.
Why would you suspect that a company flying in hundreds of laborers can’t afford a lawyer to give the same guidance your HR company gave? It’s tax evasion and cost cutting.
When I was much younger I was sent 'onsite' regularly to set up machinery that had been made by the company I worked for. This is still pretty common in anything related to industry because you're just simply not going to be able to train a local to troubleshoot/install a machine that they have no clue about. Some of this stuff takes years to become familiar with.
It’s not a language issue - it’s because a quirk in US immigration law means South Koreans are not eligible for the E-2 visa, and are stuck competing for capped categories like the H-1B.
A group of house reps have been trying to fix this issue since 2012, but have never gotten it through committee.
A group of house reps have been trying to fix this issue since 2012, but have never gotten it through committee.
>It’s a language issue.
>When I first started travelling to the US, I was carefully coached by US HR and Legal to say I was on “business” as in meetings, and not “work.”
Were you actually there for "meetings"? or actually doing stuff like writing reports?
>When I first started travelling to the US, I was carefully coached by US HR and Legal to say I was on “business” as in meetings, and not “work.”
Were you actually there for "meetings"? or actually doing stuff like writing reports?
At a former US job of mine, for a US headquartered company, I (a US citizen) was told similarly for my trips to Canada. I don't think it was by HR or legal though, it was either an older team member or one of the managers. But they reiterated that when I would occasionally travel to our Canadian office where half my team was, I should say I was there for meetings and I was not managing anyone. (I don't know what our team's manager said if they asked on the latter bit.) The primary purpose was of course meetings (and meeting artifacts), and it was never longer than a week, though my layman understanding would still call that "work", and in any case I'd have my work-issued general purpose computer with me. But this phrasing is all just to get past border control with minimum fuss and just my passport (card). I highly doubt in this particular post's case the problem is a "language issue".
On a conference trip to Italy, they basically asked me nothing. "Where are you going? Ok, next." Hardly any security either. You even had to walk through a gift shop to get to the customs area. It was nice.
On a conference trip to Italy, they basically asked me nothing. "Where are you going? Ok, next." Hardly any security either. You even had to walk through a gift shop to get to the customs area. It was nice.
Almost everyone I know who goes to the USA for “business meetings” on a b-1 actually works while in the US whether it be coding, report writing, consulting for money, professional services, etc…
That’s for me to know and you to wonder.
Trust me, no one in my role thought travelling once a quarter through EWR was a privilege. Haven’t had to visit for ten years and will never have to again, thank goodness.
Trust me, no one in my role thought travelling once a quarter through EWR was a privilege. Haven’t had to visit for ten years and will never have to again, thank goodness.
[deleted]
[deleted]
“Oh, maybe they got mixed up with the visa because language”. No they did not.
“Oh, maybe it’s really difficult to find local talent”. No it isn’t. Not for them.
There are many advantages for them to illegally fly in a whole Workforce. That is why they did it.
“