H-1B visa holders scramble for jobs after 2022 tech layoffs(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
H-1B visa holders scramble for jobs after 2022 tech layoffs
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-21/2022-tech-layoffs-leave-h-1b-visa-holders-in-limbo
157 コメント
It is easy to prove this - just create a requirement combination that is special to your target candidate:
- Software engineer
- Is able to effectively communicate in Italian and French.
- Has 3-5 years of cultural experience in Southern Italy.
- Culinary skills in contemporary Italian cuisine not required but nice to have.
- Software engineer
- Is able to effectively communicate in Italian and French.
- Has 3-5 years of cultural experience in Southern Italy.
- Culinary skills in contemporary Italian cuisine not required but nice to have.
This worked until early 00s, now a language proficiency can only be required if it's necessary to perform the job. Necessary as for a translator or an editor, not "to communicate with our off-shore team".
If you submit this job description, you would get an RFE (Request For Evidence) to explain why these skilled are requires for the job.
Addition:
- Is willing to occasionally cook team lunch.
> Part of the H-1B process is to prove you (hiring company) can't find and equal American citizen to come work for you.
This is true for a company sponsored Green Card application, not H-1B visa.
This is true for a company sponsored Green Card application, not H-1B visa.
It is true if the employer is considered H-1B dependent[0]. For employers with >51 employees if 15% or greater of the employees are H-1B workers then they must attempt to hire US workers first[1].
[0]: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/62o-h1b-recruit...
[1]: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/62c-h1b-depende...
[0]: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/62o-h1b-recruit...
[1]: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/62c-h1b-depende...
To be clear, this is not the same level as the green card PERM process (which requires jobs be advertised in physical newspapers, etc).
This simply says equally or higher qualified US workers who apply to the same job should be offered the job, but there is no need to seek out US workers.
This simply says equally or higher qualified US workers who apply to the same job should be offered the job, but there is no need to seek out US workers.
It does amount to saying if they seek out workers at all, that process needs to include seeking out US workers. At least as I read it.
> employees if 15% or greater of the employees are H-1B workers then they must attempt to hire US workers first
How does this work exactly? Say I am currently unemployed and match the criteria. They post an ad in a paper, I see it and pass the interview. At the negotiation step (because of course total comp is not listed in the ad), I say I will take the job if they pay 2X of what they would have paid to an H-1B if I did not come (again X was never mentioned, it is just the number the company keeps in mind). What next?
How does this work exactly? Say I am currently unemployed and match the criteria. They post an ad in a paper, I see it and pass the interview. At the negotiation step (because of course total comp is not listed in the ad), I say I will take the job if they pay 2X of what they would have paid to an H-1B if I did not come (again X was never mentioned, it is just the number the company keeps in mind). What next?
They may decline you then.
To hire an H-1B, the company has to do a Prevailing Wage Determination (PWD), where they ask the Department of Labor what an appropriate wage for this a) job function, b) experience level and c) geographic area is. To go forward with the H-1B, they only have to offer that much for the position.
To hire an H-1B, the company has to do a Prevailing Wage Determination (PWD), where they ask the Department of Labor what an appropriate wage for this a) job function, b) experience level and c) geographic area is. To go forward with the H-1B, they only have to offer that much for the position.
Sounds like a field ripe for corruption.
>> Part of the H-1B process is to prove you (hiring company) can't find and equal American citizen to come work for you.
> This is true for a company sponsored Green Card application, not H-1B visa.
IIRC, that's typically gamed. It's been awhile, but I knew a couple of guys who went through that and I recall they postings "to find an American citizen" were written hyper-specifically in order avoid hiring anyone, and if anyone actually applied, I'd imagine the interview would have been tough with a predetermined outcome.
It's a crappy system. Tests like that should be at the start, not at the end. If they're at the end, it just wastes everyone's time and subverts the test: even if you think the company should hire more Americans, are you going to undermine your coworker in such a way that they may get deported? Is it fair to do that after someone's put down roots? (No.)
> This is true for a company sponsored Green Card application, not H-1B visa.
IIRC, that's typically gamed. It's been awhile, but I knew a couple of guys who went through that and I recall they postings "to find an American citizen" were written hyper-specifically in order avoid hiring anyone, and if anyone actually applied, I'd imagine the interview would have been tough with a predetermined outcome.
It's a crappy system. Tests like that should be at the start, not at the end. If they're at the end, it just wastes everyone's time and subverts the test: even if you think the company should hire more Americans, are you going to undermine your coworker in such a way that they may get deported? Is it fair to do that after someone's put down roots? (No.)
That and many a time the companies do the job postings on things like local newspapers, which no one reads. This way, the companies get to prove that they posted the job someplace, but no one responded to it. USCIS and the DOL don't care either, as everyone gets to show "see, we are following protocol".
Notices are required to be posted in office breakrooms. Now that we have a lot of remote first or remote only companies... how does one see those notices? :)
Because of this exact problem, our company paused immigration for half a year in 2020. Our law firms were concerned that posting notices in an empty office could be considered in bad faith.
Nowadays, it is seen as acceptable to post it virtually, let's say on an HR page on SharePoint, in addition to the physical notice in whatever office there may be. For certain areas we also considered mailing a notice to all employees in the area, but I don't know if that ever happened. The idea is that the physical notice covers the letter of the law, and the electronic notice covers the spirit.
I don't know if DoL has issued any guidance since then, but at the time there wasn't any.
Nowadays, it is seen as acceptable to post it virtually, let's say on an HR page on SharePoint, in addition to the physical notice in whatever office there may be. For certain areas we also considered mailing a notice to all employees in the area, but I don't know if that ever happened. The idea is that the physical notice covers the letter of the law, and the electronic notice covers the spirit.
I don't know if DoL has issued any guidance since then, but at the time there wasn't any.
Yeah it is worth pursuing. Other tricks companies play is posting notices in different breakrooms organized by job function.
Probably goes under the category of "bad faith effort" which should lose in court.
The pragmatic albeit unpopular response to that is: Do not put down roots while on H-1B as you are not guaranteed anything yet.
This is true on any visa in any country. It’s like playing “life in expert mode,” dealing with unfamiliar customs, languages, and currencies; all while trying to make a living.
Yes, and that's why the immigrants who make it are the best and brightest. The average ones didn't cut it.
Living in the US is a privilege not a right until you become a citizen.
As a Former H-1B holder I'm really surprised how few people think about the intention of the program: A temporary worker program to bring highly skilled labor into the country (or allow them to stay longer) (temporarily) as demonstrated by the needs of a specific employer.
Let's not pretend there is some huge injustice here. This is a risk we must take into account as immigrants.
None of us have the automatic right to stay and work here, and that isn't the intention of the program. Immigration is not a right, it is a privilege.
Let's not pretend there is some huge injustice here. This is a risk we must take into account as immigrants.
None of us have the automatic right to stay and work here, and that isn't the intention of the program. Immigration is not a right, it is a privilege.
As a current H1B holder, I agree. I always say that visa workers may not realize it at first but the day they stand outside the consulate for their visa interview, they indirectly agree to whatever headaches come with being on an H1B (or any sort of work visa for that matter).
> As a current H1B holder, I agree
It seems like the only people who do understand the program are the people who are directly participating in it.
It seems like the only people who do understand the program are the people who are directly participating in it.
I agree with the parent and grandparent comments.
That said, when I was sponsored for an E-3 visa by a US company the recruiters made it clear that my position was permanent (subject to performance) and that the company would sponsor me for a Green Card.
These representations were contradicted by the legal documents I presented in my interview at the US consulate.
Nonetheless, I can imagine some employees on these sorts of visas might take their employer at their word and plan their lives accordingly.
That said, when I was sponsored for an E-3 visa by a US company the recruiters made it clear that my position was permanent (subject to performance) and that the company would sponsor me for a Green Card.
These representations were contradicted by the legal documents I presented in my interview at the US consulate.
Nonetheless, I can imagine some employees on these sorts of visas might take their employer at their word and plan their lives accordingly.
though i agree with you overall, right now the system is totally not working for indians and to a some extend chinese.
The current wait time for indians is over 100 years whereas all other countries get their green card in a couple of years(after green card sponsorship).
This makes the system crushing the Indians who have roots for more than decades.
For people who would say , you should have seen it coming , recently the demand from other countries are too high that wait time for indians are in decades at minimum
The current wait time for indians is over 100 years whereas all other countries get their green card in a couple of years(after green card sponsorship).
This makes the system crushing the Indians who have roots for more than decades.
For people who would say , you should have seen it coming , recently the demand from other countries are too high that wait time for indians are in decades at minimum
I am an Indian H1b holder. The system is not meant to be beneficial for a nationality or a group of nationalities. Indians very well know that the green card waiting times are super long, and yet they'll come here, give birth to kids, buy a house, etc. All on a temporary visa with a very, very long waiting period for their green card. Maybe don't try to set roots if you know that you will not get permanent residency?
Just because you've accepted your unfair situation - which, let's be clear, is that you have a second-class status even compared to other foreigners based solely on your country of birth - doesn't mean everyone else in that situation should do the same.
Other H-1B holders who point out this inequity are not morally "wrong", or "crybabies" (paraphrased from another of your comments). Petitioning the government for a redressal of grievances is a very American thing to do. And doing what you have done - accepting the reality of one's situation and adapting to it - is very mentally healthy and pragmatic.
Some people, like you, work around the existing system, while others ask for a better system. Neither group should put down the other, or denigrate the choices they have made. Try to be a better person than that.
Other H-1B holders who point out this inequity are not morally "wrong", or "crybabies" (paraphrased from another of your comments). Petitioning the government for a redressal of grievances is a very American thing to do. And doing what you have done - accepting the reality of one's situation and adapting to it - is very mentally healthy and pragmatic.
Some people, like you, work around the existing system, while others ask for a better system. Neither group should put down the other, or denigrate the choices they have made. Try to be a better person than that.
many are choosing not to come. The US student visa has been on decline especially from india and china.
What about people who are already here for decades ?
Some don't understand the complexity of the system and think their case will be different
What about people who are already here for decades ?
Some don't understand the complexity of the system and think their case will be different
>What about people who are already here for decades ?
They need to understand that immigration is a privilege and not a right. If it were a right, then could have successfully sued the US government in a court of law and gotten their green cards ages ago. They forget that and start crying when faced with long wait times. The US didn't invite them , they made the decision to come here.
They need to understand that immigration is a privilege and not a right. If it were a right, then could have successfully sued the US government in a court of law and gotten their green cards ages ago. They forget that and start crying when faced with long wait times. The US didn't invite them , they made the decision to come here.
I am a US citizen and I don't want to live in a country that has a "guest worker force" with reduced rights and no path towards citizenship. I don't want this because I think it's ugly (and societies that engage in too much of this are always ugly), but I also think that it's bad for citizens as well as the people treated this way. A healthy society should not have its employers maintaining a labor force full of employees who can be shipped back overseas whenever the company feels like it: this is a recipe for labor abuse, and such abuse can harm citizens as well as non-citizens. So TL;DR if you're over here working, I want you to have some rights and a path towards citizenship. I don't want a bunch of people slaving away at 2am and being told this is a privilege.
ETA: I am not saying the H1B program is that, just responding to the sentiments up above.
ETA: I am not saying the H1B program is that, just responding to the sentiments up above.
I agree with you that immigration is a privilege not a right.
However it's not good for a nation to discriminate people from certain countries worse than they treat people from rest of the world.
No system is perfect, and we go through iterations of refining the laws/solutions.
What most people are calling out is this discrimination in a peaceful manner and asking for a change.
Without people asking for change, nothing would have changed in history. The entire labor rights and freedom from slavery were as a result of people asking for a change and to be treated equally on the same set of standards.
American culture(as i understand) is based on concept that anyone can raise up and become successful based on ones own merit. The current legal immigration system for Indians fails to provide it.
And people are currently pointing out the flaw in the system.
However it's not good for a nation to discriminate people from certain countries worse than they treat people from rest of the world.
No system is perfect, and we go through iterations of refining the laws/solutions.
What most people are calling out is this discrimination in a peaceful manner and asking for a change.
Without people asking for change, nothing would have changed in history. The entire labor rights and freedom from slavery were as a result of people asking for a change and to be treated equally on the same set of standards.
American culture(as i understand) is based on concept that anyone can raise up and become successful based on ones own merit. The current legal immigration system for Indians fails to provide it.
And people are currently pointing out the flaw in the system.
> The US didn't invite them
i have to disagree with you on this.
USA did invite them here and provided a dual intent visa(H1b).
Every H1b visa holder did go to embassy and got interviewed by US Visa officer.
so USA very well knew the people who were invited to work in USA can become a US citizen eventually.
i have to disagree with you on this.
USA did invite them here and provided a dual intent visa(H1b).
Every H1b visa holder did go to embassy and got interviewed by US Visa officer.
so USA very well knew the people who were invited to work in USA can become a US citizen eventually.
I mean, the cynic would say that you have the kids in the USA and eventually they can sponsor you for a visa. Especially if it takes 100 years to go the normal path.
But arguing you shouldn't have children... really?
But arguing you shouldn't have children... really?
I see your point. Yes for those born in countries with traditionally high immigration rates the system is broken. Even if an employer can demonstrate they need to retain a particular person if this employer later needs to terminate the employee for unrelated reasons you are screwed.
I think the H-1B to EB-2 and EB-1 process should be improved to not be subject to immigration rates.
I think the H-1B to EB-2 and EB-1 process should be improved to not be subject to immigration rates.
well, it's broken because of a particular high demand from those countries that's different from the others. I don't think the system should explicitly discriminate one country from the other, but I think it's fair to give a chance to other countries at an equal rate.
Visas/green cards are given to people and not countries
The people waiting in the employment green card lines are evaluated on the same set of criteria . Their ability to perform a particular task for their employer.
The people waiting in the employment green card lines are evaluated on the same set of criteria . Their ability to perform a particular task for their employer.
Even though it is a privilege, I think it is still important to treat people with kindness and respect. The way that the US treats people on h1bs, especially if they are from countries with extremely long waits for green cards, is heartless, in my opinion.
There are a lot of things that we don't have to do to help our fellow human but that we still should do.
There are a lot of things that we don't have to do to help our fellow human but that we still should do.
The result is already showing up : https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/indias-brain...
There is nothing heartless about it, if the system doesn't work for people born in one particular country. I say this as an Indian H1B holder.
If anything, the US has given me opportunities that I wouldn't get in India. I work on a front office team at an HFT. In India, for front office roles, most of the HFT's don't hire anyone not from the IIT's. My resume would be thrown straight in the bin, if I were still in India. A while back, FAANG offices in India would only prefer hiring from the top tier Indian schools.
If anything, the US has given me opportunities that I wouldn't get in India. I work on a front office team at an HFT. In India, for front office roles, most of the HFT's don't hire anyone not from the IIT's. My resume would be thrown straight in the bin, if I were still in India. A while back, FAANG offices in India would only prefer hiring from the top tier Indian schools.
I think everyone is treated with respect. No country has to process permanent residency applications for everyone, and no country has to provide a visa for foreigners to work period. The system is overwhelmed and they get to make their policies. I've read something once that really struck me: if you have skills which you think are valuable, have gone through extensive education and training, and subject yourself to the whims of a random system to decide your future, you're not unlucky, you're just dumb.
How is that dumb? May be their calculation of odds in making it big (financially or otherwise) resulted in taking that chance. It’s not just direct money when someone educated and smart wants to work here. There is indirect money that comes in form of connections that have significant dividends long term even if they get kicked out. Not to mention a new cultural experience.. So I’d say people make calculations. You have no idea about the decision making process.
There's a difference between temporary and sudden. Knowing you can stay only for 6 years is temporary. Finding out that you could theoretically be here for a long time but your life could be yanked away any minute is sudden and an uprooting that no one deserves.
that assumption is really "theoretical" and personal. The visa conditions don't tell you can stay for an arbitrarily long time. As others have pointed out, H1B is explicitly temporary and does not in itself lead to a permanent residency path. The US is not like others countries, say UK, where staying for 10 years in some visas or 5 years in a work visa lead you to PR. What they've transformed the H1B in is sort of "unwarranted"
400,000 current H-1B visa holders[0] divided by 999 at-risk holders (article describes "hundreds") leaves us with less than 0.25% of the visa-holding population at risk. It's very possible that I'm heavily overstating that percentage. How is this even news?
[0]https://www.stilt.com/blog/2019/04/h1b-visa-holders-in-usa/
[0]https://www.stilt.com/blog/2019/04/h1b-visa-holders-in-usa/
332,000,000 people in the US divided by 999 at-risk holders leaves us with less than 0.0003% of the population at risk.
I don't think percentages are useful here. Hundreds of human beings suffering is something I will always empathize with.
I don't think percentages are useful here. Hundreds of human beings suffering is something I will always empathize with.
As a citizen, if I get laid off, I get a severance package and support from the state. It is ok if I get laid off. Temporary inconvenience, but family doesn't need to suffer. It is not the case for H1B visa holders.
If H1B visa holder gets laid off, they need to find a job in 60 days. That is a lot of stress. Suppose they find a in different state, they need to move. This is stress for the family and children as well. In the worst case, they may need to leave the country. It is harder, because they need to sell all their properties, move the stuff and relocate the family in an extremely short period of time. I think the H1B rules are draconian.
IMHO, H1B must be reformed or abolished. In the current form, it only benefits big companies to hire great talent for cheap and keep under their control. Similar to bonded labour.
If H1B visa holder gets laid off, they need to find a job in 60 days. That is a lot of stress. Suppose they find a in different state, they need to move. This is stress for the family and children as well. In the worst case, they may need to leave the country. It is harder, because they need to sell all their properties, move the stuff and relocate the family in an extremely short period of time. I think the H1B rules are draconian.
IMHO, H1B must be reformed or abolished. In the current form, it only benefits big companies to hire great talent for cheap and keep under their control. Similar to bonded labour.
How EXACTLY does it work for someone laid off from Twitter, for example? Does the 60 day clock begin the moment they were "laid off" or the moment severance runs out? Does it matter if the company puts them on garden leave instead of immediate lay-off?
The thing that grinds my gears (I'm a H1B holder) is that no one really knows the answer to this question, including immigration lawyers who post on linkedin). The general advice is to start the clock the day you are laid off.
I suspect that is true in general - but in the particular of Twitter I wonder if it legally counts as "garden leave" to get around the WARN act, meaning that those people are still "employed" by Twitter for the purposes of the H1B.
It'd be kinda annoying if they could have it one way for the WARN act and it was another way for the H1B.
It'd be kinda annoying if they could have it one way for the WARN act and it was another way for the H1B.
I think it would be helpful to ask USCIS to develop a clear policy.
> How EXACTLY does it work for someone laid off from Twitter, for example? Does the 60 day clock begin the moment they were “laid off” or the moment severance runs out? Does it matter if the company puts them on garden leave instead of immediate lay-off?
EDIT: This apparently is wrong, see downthread; the original text below is preserved for context
When they are no longer legally employed, with legal employment including any terminal leave. (But not extended by severance, even if that is calculated based on pay for a particular time period.)
EDIT: This apparently is wrong, see downthread; the original text below is preserved for context
When they are no longer legally employed, with legal employment including any terminal leave. (But not extended by severance, even if that is calculated based on pay for a particular time period.)
Here have an immigration lawyer here writing[1] it's not the legal employment end date that matters, but the date productive work ended.
But also it's not clear, and it might be the legal employment end date in some cases.
1. http://blog.cyrusmehta.com/2022/11/guide-to-terminated-nonci...
But also it's not clear, and it might be the legal employment end date in some cases.
1. http://blog.cyrusmehta.com/2022/11/guide-to-terminated-nonci...
Shit, by that metric for some of the jobs I have had the hire date and productive work ending date are the same.
The moment they are laid off. The severance is an interesting question, do they even get it?
Anecdata : 20+ yrs ago I worked in US on a H1B. My employer was almost bust due to the telecoms bubble bursting and I got laid off. Got 3 weeks severance pay for 1 yr service - seemed fair at the time given the situation , and dunno what people got when whole company collapsed few weeks later. Was assuming would get kicked out of the country in fairly short time if didn't find a new job. 60 days? Seem to think it used to be shorter than that. So, went to a job fair, did a few interviews. Decided to go and at least see Yellowstone before being kicked outta the country. Went to check email at the library (as one did before smartphones ;) ) There was a job offer, better location and better pay and it ultimately turned out far more enjoyable. Had to drive non-stop all the way back to Seattle to sign paperwork. Then , it was actually a 3 month wait before I could start that new job due to the H1B transfer process being slow, which is kind of ridiculous. Couldn't go back to family in UK for xmas the year as not allowed in and out of country while they doing the paperwork, which was a downer. Wasn't getting paid during that time either. Did volunteer at Snoqualmie pass and went on the hill lots of days which was the silver lining. I have to say, this would be really bad if you have a spouse and kids. I was single at the time, wouldn't wanna put family through that. It also led to a feeling of limbo and ultimately I left the USA because what starts out as a fun adventure ends up after a few years being not so fun anymore having no permanent status. I think that once someone has worked and paid taxes in the US one ought to be treated a little bit kinder. Perhaps the longer you've worked, the longer you should be allowed to stay after being laid off? They should make allowances for people with kids for sure, its wrong to treat kids lie that, must cause a lot of stress for families.
Especially when you consider that because of natal citizenship, you could have come over with a young wife, had a kid, and then been laid off - and your kid is a US citizen!
Hadn't thought of that! That's a massive issue. Arguably the parents should be allowed permanent status then but of course then people will claim there's an incentive for people to come to US and have kid(s). But in a sense, if you've let people in on a highly skilled visa, they're at the age of having a family, they're pretty much guaranteed to be a big net positive for US economy so what's the problem giving them permanent residency... But then one could argue it's unfair not to give the same thing to kids of Mexican parents that entered illegally. But if you did that , that really would be an incentive for half of Mexico to try to come to USA and have a kid. Personally I think that might be a net win for both USA and Mexico, and there's plenty of space in USA, but I guess a lot of Americans would disagree...
The only way to know for sure is to wait after severance runs out and file a transfer to the new company.
If USCIS denies your application, then the 60 day clock starts the moment you stopped working (for Twitter laid off folks, this has already started). If USCIS approves your application, then the 60 day clock begins the moment you stopped being an employee of the company (for Twitter laid off folks, this is January 4).
If USCIS denies your application, then the 60 day clock starts the moment you stopped working (for Twitter laid off folks, this has already started). If USCIS approves your application, then the 60 day clock begins the moment you stopped being an employee of the company (for Twitter laid off folks, this is January 4).
You know, maybe there's a way.. concurrent h1b. Maybe all the h1bs "unionize" in the sense that they get to work part time for another h1b sponsor (the h1b union). Call this the H1B union corp. That way if they lose their official job, the h1b union they can stay beyond the 60 days to look for work.
I dunno, this would need an immigration lawyer to weigh in on. There's a YC one who appears from time to time.. This could be something YC does which would make startups more attractive to h1bs.
I dunno, this would need an immigration lawyer to weigh in on. There's a YC one who appears from time to time.. This could be something YC does which would make startups more attractive to h1bs.
I personally didn't check the numbers, but even if the percentage is "only" 0.25% it gives a strong message to the rest of 99.75% that they should take care and especially that they should not make any fuss at their current job, otherwise they might risk losing almost everything they have built in the US. Not that the great majority of those 99.75% don't already know it.
Related to this, it is high time for this indentured servitude-like legislation to be scrapped for good, but as long as the people affected earn relatively good money I guess we won't see a real move against it anytime soon.
Related to this, it is high time for this indentured servitude-like legislation to be scrapped for good, but as long as the people affected earn relatively good money I guess we won't see a real move against it anytime soon.
Hoping this is helpful for some of the folks affected: https://www.bridge.legal/resources/free-legal-services-for-l...
Are you trying to suppress wages for citizen tech workers? This is how you suppress wages for citizen tech workers.
It's a net gain for America to have more skilled tech workers. If that means slightly lower wages for everyone, so be it. Given the number of large tech companies founded by immigrants, I'm not certain wage suppression is a given anyway.
I feel the same way about doctors and other highly paid skilled professions, and immigration as a whole.
I feel the same way about doctors and other highly paid skilled professions, and immigration as a whole.
The benefits are split $200,000 for faang and -$150,000 the rest of the country though.
Conversely, if the sector grows, it may well be that all workers in it make more. This has been the trend in many, many high tech scenarios.
Or, we can let the skilled workers end up elsewhere, those places develop the next innovations, and soon the high paying jobs are not here, but have moved to those places willing to invest in talent.
The main reason the US has such high salaries is not that we stopped skilled workers coming here - around 50% of Fortune 500 companies were started here by imiigrants.
I, as a US citizen, want the world's best and brightest to come here, so I can learn, have to compete, and become part of improving tech sectors, not backwater xenophobic countries banning workers.
It's historically extremely shortsighted to think that having to compete solely makes wages lower. If that were true, we'd all have lower wages than our ancestors, which is demonstrably untrue.
Or, we can let the skilled workers end up elsewhere, those places develop the next innovations, and soon the high paying jobs are not here, but have moved to those places willing to invest in talent.
The main reason the US has such high salaries is not that we stopped skilled workers coming here - around 50% of Fortune 500 companies were started here by imiigrants.
I, as a US citizen, want the world's best and brightest to come here, so I can learn, have to compete, and become part of improving tech sectors, not backwater xenophobic countries banning workers.
It's historically extremely shortsighted to think that having to compete solely makes wages lower. If that were true, we'd all have lower wages than our ancestors, which is demonstrably untrue.
> The main reason the US has such high salaries is not that we stopped skilled workers coming here - around 50% of Fortune 500 companies were started here by imiigrants
Well, its also not because of immigration, at least not mainly. Europe has plenty of immigration and salaries are much lower. In my non expert view its the U.S world hegemony and dollar's status as reserve currency that do the trick. U.S can stop immigration tomorrow and still salaries will be very high for decades.
Well, its also not because of immigration, at least not mainly. Europe has plenty of immigration and salaries are much lower. In my non expert view its the U.S world hegemony and dollar's status as reserve currency that do the trick. U.S can stop immigration tomorrow and still salaries will be very high for decades.
It's closer to 25 percent for immigrants. Your stat includes children of immigrants.
Maybe the US is just a better place for business? With the attraction to immigrants being an effect not a cause. Economic predictions have been saying for decades that the number of software engineering jobs will be increasing much faster than the population. It's supply and demand.
Maybe the US is just a better place for business? With the attraction to immigrants being an effect not a cause. Economic predictions have been saying for decades that the number of software engineering jobs will be increasing much faster than the population. It's supply and demand.
> If that were true, we'd all have lower wages than our ancestors, which is demonstrably untrue.
I got a good laugh out of that…
Every study I’ve heard about says that relative wages have been steadily decreasing compared to earlier generations. This naturally leads to a lower standard of living which, incidentally, get covered over by technological advances.
Not that I blame immigration for this but take issue with the “demonstrably untrue” part.
You can prove that my niece making $15/hr in 2022 is higher than her mother making $5/hr in 1987 for essentially the same job but what’s the relative difference?
I got a good laugh out of that…
Every study I’ve heard about says that relative wages have been steadily decreasing compared to earlier generations. This naturally leads to a lower standard of living which, incidentally, get covered over by technological advances.
Not that I blame immigration for this but take issue with the “demonstrably untrue” part.
You can prove that my niece making $15/hr in 2022 is higher than her mother making $5/hr in 1987 for essentially the same job but what’s the relative difference?
>Every study I’ve heard about says that relative wages have been steadily decreasing compared to earlier generations
Cite one. There's ample evidence (Census, BLS, FRED, many more) pointing otherwise. For example, here [1] is FRED inflation adjusted median personal income, which is clearly not at all near your claim. Here's [2] FRED inflation adjusted median household income, also no where near your claim.
There are many relevant factors that make this tricky, and pop econ often presents bad data. For example, wages is not total remuneration (which is tracked by BLS) which is not total cost to employ (also tracked by BLS). Both of those include other factors changing over time, such as more vacation, healthcare perks, regulatory requirement changes (FMLA, OSHA, more). So if you're going to talk about wages, you need to address total benefits. Hint: this factor is extremely relevant.
Also, you need to adjust properly for demographics. On average people make more as they age. So as a population ages or gets younger, median and mean wages can change for the entire population, but it's not an accurate comparison: it is possible for every person at every age to make more than a person in a previous generation at that age, yet for the median to decrease, simply because demographics are changing where in careers the median lies. Hint: this factor is relevant.
You also need to be careful if you're talking household wages, since household makeup also changes over time.
When you consider these and other relevant factors, I've seen nothing that points to people being poorer than previous generations in any widespread or wholesale grouping, at any decile of the income breakdown. And I've spent significant time researching this issue.
In fact, if you correct the first order data I just presented from FRED, the modern person makes even more than the FRED graph: the workforce are skewing younger (as Boomers retire), companies are adding more benefits (both to compete and because of legislative requirements), and households are becoming more single person (i.e. single earner), yet the median household income still grows.
So, cite your evidence.
[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N [2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
Cite one. There's ample evidence (Census, BLS, FRED, many more) pointing otherwise. For example, here [1] is FRED inflation adjusted median personal income, which is clearly not at all near your claim. Here's [2] FRED inflation adjusted median household income, also no where near your claim.
There are many relevant factors that make this tricky, and pop econ often presents bad data. For example, wages is not total remuneration (which is tracked by BLS) which is not total cost to employ (also tracked by BLS). Both of those include other factors changing over time, such as more vacation, healthcare perks, regulatory requirement changes (FMLA, OSHA, more). So if you're going to talk about wages, you need to address total benefits. Hint: this factor is extremely relevant.
Also, you need to adjust properly for demographics. On average people make more as they age. So as a population ages or gets younger, median and mean wages can change for the entire population, but it's not an accurate comparison: it is possible for every person at every age to make more than a person in a previous generation at that age, yet for the median to decrease, simply because demographics are changing where in careers the median lies. Hint: this factor is relevant.
You also need to be careful if you're talking household wages, since household makeup also changes over time.
When you consider these and other relevant factors, I've seen nothing that points to people being poorer than previous generations in any widespread or wholesale grouping, at any decile of the income breakdown. And I've spent significant time researching this issue.
In fact, if you correct the first order data I just presented from FRED, the modern person makes even more than the FRED graph: the workforce are skewing younger (as Boomers retire), companies are adding more benefits (both to compete and because of legislative requirements), and households are becoming more single person (i.e. single earner), yet the median household income still grows.
So, cite your evidence.
[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N [2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
$5 in 1987 is around $13.12 in 2022 dollars.
> $5 in 1987 is around $13.12 in 2022 dollars.
Huh, not sure what all these minimum wage workers are complaining about then, that’s like 14% better.
Huh, not sure what all these minimum wage workers are complaining about then, that’s like 14% better.
US min wage is 7.50. Does that adjust your view?
That’s not what the H1B program is for, though.
It's no use. I agree with you, but most of the people who want to help H-1Bs see it as reductive and archaic to try and promote the welfare of your own citizens over that of foreigners.
>promote the welfare of your own citizens over that of foreigners
Isolationist countries end up with poorer people, in the same way if you made an isolationist state, county, city, or household, would simply end up making you poorer.
It's a shame more people don't read economics widely enough to understand this.
Isolationist countries end up with poorer people, in the same way if you made an isolationist state, county, city, or household, would simply end up making you poorer.
It's a shame more people don't read economics widely enough to understand this.
An "isolationist country" and a "country that ensures that its natural-born citizens are well-provided for before admitting new labor that will compete harder for lower rewards" are not necessarily the same thing.
Do they? The Scandinavian countries have almost no skilled immigration, and had very little unskilled immigration until recently. Sweden still seems like a pretty great place to live.
Average results over all valid candidates. Picking a best case example from many valid candidates is as fallacious as picking a worst case example.
Sweden also has a PPP adjusted median disposable income over 30% lower than in the US [1]. I'd prefer to live here.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income
Sweden also has a PPP adjusted median disposable income over 30% lower than in the US [1]. I'd prefer to live here.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income
thrown_22(1)
Software engineers create jobs for software engineers. The reason why you can make 4x more money in SF than in London is because the entire world flocks to SF to work in software. Those H1B workers are making you money, not costing you money.
[deleted]
It’s a balance between siphoning brain away from the rest of the world and maintaining decent wages. Wages for developers are definitely not low, and that’s the truth.
This is a service to facilitate H1B sponsorship
"Lowering America Citizen Wages" is a problem with American Companies paying less to foreigners, not with foreigners being available for hire.
The comment is xenophobic
"Lowering America Citizen Wages" is a problem with American Companies paying less to foreigners, not with foreigners being available for hire.
The comment is xenophobic
As ex-H1 immigrant I will dare to explain.
Companies are paying absolute minimum they can. It is only rational.
The problem is with expectations. A lot of H1 workers are used to a much lower quality of life than native workers. US graduate would want to have a 40 hour work-week, separate bedroom, 401k and such. For a foreign worker from a less reach region 401k and medical are not a requirement, sharing a bedroom with 3 other guys is not an issue. Working round a clock is fine as long as you can send money to your family back in the old country. Oh, also in US you can afford a car that will make you look super-successful on social media.
Do you really want to drive down quality of life for everybody.
Companies are paying absolute minimum they can. It is only rational.
The problem is with expectations. A lot of H1 workers are used to a much lower quality of life than native workers. US graduate would want to have a 40 hour work-week, separate bedroom, 401k and such. For a foreign worker from a less reach region 401k and medical are not a requirement, sharing a bedroom with 3 other guys is not an issue. Working round a clock is fine as long as you can send money to your family back in the old country. Oh, also in US you can afford a car that will make you look super-successful on social media.
Do you really want to drive down quality of life for everybody.
The majority of H-1 workers (in my experience as a former H-1 worker) went to university in the US and then transition to H-1B. They have the same salary expectations as their American peers and get the same offers.
Maybe this salary injustice exists for H-1Bs being hired from abroad, but it doesn't exist initially for most H-1Bs when entering the job market. Of course 2 years into the job is a different story because H-1Bs have less negotiation power to seek out other jobs and get good retention offers etc
Maybe this salary injustice exists for H-1Bs being hired from abroad, but it doesn't exist initially for most H-1Bs when entering the job market. Of course 2 years into the job is a different story because H-1Bs have less negotiation power to seek out other jobs and get good retention offers etc
I would seriously doubt that most H1 workers come from US colleges. It is a common knowledge that most H1s go to Tata/Infosys and friends.
Also, I would wonder: 1. How much of those foreign graduates went to college solely for a visa. 2. I would also expect that those graduates have much lower expectations from the life style. Young men don't really need a lot of money and have a lot of time to spend at work.
Also, I would wonder: 1. How much of those foreign graduates went to college solely for a visa. 2. I would also expect that those graduates have much lower expectations from the life style. Young men don't really need a lot of money and have a lot of time to spend at work.
Tata/Infosys etc are some of the largest single employers of H-1Bs, but collectively it really does seem that the majority of new H-1Bs every year are in fact issued to people already in the country on F-1 student visas.
Go ahead and ask any immigrant who had a H-1B about their path. I am confident you will come to the same conclusion.
Go ahead and ask any immigrant who had a H-1B about their path. I am confident you will come to the same conclusion.
I am 100% certain you have a selection bias. Imagine if you worked in Tata/Infosys and started asking around.
From my experience most h1s are imported by vendors. I've seen a lot of really small "consulting companies" who does this. I had heard over and over again that most regular companies are terrified of having to deal with H1s, due to extra cost and lots of uncertainty.
From my experience most h1s are imported by vendors. I've seen a lot of really small "consulting companies" who does this. I had heard over and over again that most regular companies are terrified of having to deal with H1s, due to extra cost and lots of uncertainty.
Selection bias or not - I am saying across any employers out there, go ahead and ask folks. Maybe you don't realize how many people in your companies are or were on H-1B and came via this route.
The H-1B program is heavily used by graduates from US institutions.
I would welcome someone actually studying this rigorously. I am confident my observations will hold. There is also no evidence to assume that Indian consulting services occupy the majority of H-1Bs.
The H-1B program is heavily used by graduates from US institutions.
I would welcome someone actually studying this rigorously. I am confident my observations will hold. There is also no evidence to assume that Indian consulting services occupy the majority of H-1Bs.
They might have the same expectations, but their manager certainly knows that they are visa dependent and can assign a higher workload to them than they would to their peers who have green cards or US citizenship.
(Some of these peers might be their classmates from a US university, who got their green cards near-instantly by virtue of being born in a smaller country).
(Some of these peers might be their classmates from a US university, who got their green cards near-instantly by virtue of being born in a smaller country).
It is really nice if you actually work on site of company that holds your visa. A lot of H1s work in consulting companies that place them with the clients. These people are second-class citizens in the office, have much lower salary and less benefits. I've seen a lot of people who came to a company from some low-cost of living state - and being posted in California with the salary that is calculated based on that state. Also, those people with their families get tossed across the States really unceremoniously.
Sadly this is going to really change our tech community. I suspect many US citizens, especially at large US companies, have no idea how many colleagues', coworkers' and friends' ability to stay in the United State ultimately rests on their being a strong demand for tech talent.
Most of our discussions around the system impact of layoffs have been in regard to changes in TC long term, but I personally think that's minor compared to potentially saying goodbye to some friends for a long time.
The issue is not just this current scramble, but if the job market in tech does shrink and continue to do so we're going to see the number of places sponsoring H1B shrink tremendously. Estimates are hard to come by accurately, but the number of H1B holders in tech is fairly large, this could be a change that quite literally changes the face of tech in the US.
Most of our discussions around the system impact of layoffs have been in regard to changes in TC long term, but I personally think that's minor compared to potentially saying goodbye to some friends for a long time.
The issue is not just this current scramble, but if the job market in tech does shrink and continue to do so we're going to see the number of places sponsoring H1B shrink tremendously. Estimates are hard to come by accurately, but the number of H1B holders in tech is fairly large, this could be a change that quite literally changes the face of tech in the US.
There are about 150 good computer schools in the US producing 400 employable graduates on average in the tech industry, total of 60000 engineers. 60000+ H1Bs come every year. H1B is a necessity because the need is too high. H1B is not replacing US workers.
Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33677860
There are legal versions of that approach.
There are legal versions of that approach.
I've long been embarrassed that US immigration law so often errs on the side of xenophobia and cruelty.
That said, I don't understand education+early career visas. "Come get an education at one of our universities, and then take your utility elsewhere!" If we're gonna train people, we should have onramps to employment so our economy can benefit too.
That said, I don't understand education+early career visas. "Come get an education at one of our universities, and then take your utility elsewhere!" If we're gonna train people, we should have onramps to employment so our economy can benefit too.
You literally have no idea about the immigration policies in other countries. Some countries won't let you become citizens unless it's by blood no matter how long you've lived there (Japan). Many countries will force you to give up your citizenship if you want to get a new citizenship. The US and Canada have the most lenient and generous citizenship policies in the world.
I personally think we should only confer citizenship on people who are in the country legally. There's too many tourist vacationers that come here to give birth to their child, incur hospital fees that they won't pay, and then fly back home. The fact it takes so long for actual good immigrants is terrible policy. My close friend from India who was making over $1 million per year at FAANG has been waiting over a decade for his Green Card. The system is a mess. He is also a proponent of very strong immigration rules because he sees how the rules are being bent and it's utterly unfair for those who follow the rules.
I personally think we should only confer citizenship on people who are in the country legally. There's too many tourist vacationers that come here to give birth to their child, incur hospital fees that they won't pay, and then fly back home. The fact it takes so long for actual good immigrants is terrible policy. My close friend from India who was making over $1 million per year at FAANG has been waiting over a decade for his Green Card. The system is a mess. He is also a proponent of very strong immigration rules because he sees how the rules are being bent and it's utterly unfair for those who follow the rules.
"You literally have no idea about the immigration policies in other countries"
It's ironic that you say that, but are making claims that just aren't correct.
"The US and Canada have the most lenient and generous citizenship policies in the world."
This is widely agreed to be false. I'll refer to the following sites:
https://flagtheory.com/ja/easiest-countries-to-become-a-citi...
https://getgoldenvisa.com/easiest-countries-to-get-citizensh...
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/easiest-c...
You'll notice there are many countries with 2 or 3 year citizenship tracks as the default, while the US's is 5 years, and requires significantly more difficulty.
The US isn't anywhere near the top of any of those lists.
The US policy is certainly better than a lot of countries, but that doesn't make it "most generous in the world", just not "least generous".
It's ironic that you say that, but are making claims that just aren't correct.
"The US and Canada have the most lenient and generous citizenship policies in the world."
This is widely agreed to be false. I'll refer to the following sites:
https://flagtheory.com/ja/easiest-countries-to-become-a-citi...
https://getgoldenvisa.com/easiest-countries-to-get-citizensh...
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/easiest-c...
You'll notice there are many countries with 2 or 3 year citizenship tracks as the default, while the US's is 5 years, and requires significantly more difficulty.
The US isn't anywhere near the top of any of those lists.
The US policy is certainly better than a lot of countries, but that doesn't make it "most generous in the world", just not "least generous".
But we aren't talking about years, are we? We are talking about total numbers of immigrants allowed. What is the USA's ranking in total legal immigration?
> You literally have no idea about the immigration policies in other countries.
That's a big accusation.
I'm entitled to feel embarrassed about the problems with our system, regardless of if some other country does a better or worse job than we do.
> There's too many tourist vacationers that come here to give birth to their child, incur hospital fees that they won't pay, and then fly back home.
[citation needed]
That's a big accusation.
I'm entitled to feel embarrassed about the problems with our system, regardless of if some other country does a better or worse job than we do.
> There's too many tourist vacationers that come here to give birth to their child, incur hospital fees that they won't pay, and then fly back home.
[citation needed]
If he makes $1m/year why doesn't he sponsor himself for an investor green card? It's a no-brainer.
I work in HFT, and have seen lots of people from India, China, who are traders and quants, do just that. If they're good, they get big bonuses, save them for a few years and apply for an EB-5. With devs it's a longer path to get there, but I will probably be trying that in a few years if I can, till then I can move to Canada on my Canadian residency permit.
Japan definitely does allow naturalization for non-Japanese, source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nationality_law
Germany allows too since I have seen many, many first generation immigrants become German citizens.
Germany allows too since I have seen many, many first generation immigrants become German citizens.
Did you bother to read the article that you posted?
"Foreigners over the age of 18 (or age 20 prior to April 1, 2022) may become Japanese citizens by naturalization after residing in the country for at least five years, renouncing any previous nationalities, and proving self-sufficiency through their occupation or existing financial assets."
You have to renounce previous nationalities, whereas the reverse the United States is much more generous towards the possibility of dual citizenship.
"Foreigners over the age of 18 (or age 20 prior to April 1, 2022) may become Japanese citizens by naturalization after residing in the country for at least five years, renouncing any previous nationalities, and proving self-sufficiency through their occupation or existing financial assets."
You have to renounce previous nationalities, whereas the reverse the United States is much more generous towards the possibility of dual citizenship.
I did, did you bother to read that the OP I responded to posted "Some countries won't let you become citizens unless it's by blood no matter how long you've lived there (Japan)"?
I was pointing out that Japan does let people become citizens after they've lived there for a period of time, the OP was suggesting the complete opposite. Renouncing previous nationalities is not the same as Japan not allowing people to become citizens, no matter how long they have lived there.
I was pointing out that Japan does let people become citizens after they've lived there for a period of time, the OP was suggesting the complete opposite. Renouncing previous nationalities is not the same as Japan not allowing people to become citizens, no matter how long they have lived there.
Japanese also have to renounce other nationalities. So it's not only about immigrants but also all nationals.
>"I've long been embarrassed that US immigration law so often errs on the side of xenophobia and cruelty."
The United States has some of the most generous and charitable immigration policies of all countries on Earth. The problem is that the sheer number of people trying to immigrate means that it appears cruel for turning so many people down. Particularly when people don't look into just how restrictive other developed nations are with their own policies.
The United States has some of the most generous and charitable immigration policies of all countries on Earth. The problem is that the sheer number of people trying to immigrate means that it appears cruel for turning so many people down. Particularly when people don't look into just how restrictive other developed nations are with their own policies.
This is correct. Most European countries have much more stringent immigration policies. Switzerland is a great example, where the process is longer and also they checks to see whether an applicant has indeed assimilated well, are a lot better.
Western nations need to adopt more stringent immigration policies and also be much more rigorous in testing how well the applicants have assimilated. Most of the current 1st gen. immigrants hardly make any effort to assimilate.
Western nations need to adopt more stringent immigration policies and also be much more rigorous in testing how well the applicants have assimilated. Most of the current 1st gen. immigrants hardly make any effort to assimilate.
Modern US culture holds that assimilation is an evil to be avoided. The old metaphor of the "melting pot" has been tossed out in favor of a "salad bowl". Assimilation is the opposite of diversity, and since diversity is good, assimilation is bad.
This attitude is going about as well as you'd expect.
This attitude is going about as well as you'd expect.
Europe is seeing the "benefits" of this policy, Canada will soon be next. The "geniuses" supporting all this do not realize is that this is how you destroy the culture that your ancestors built, screw up social harmony among different groups, and how your fuel the rise of people joining alt-right movements.
No it doesn't. Simply asserting this statement does not make it so. Modern US culture is very much anti undocumented immigration, but that is something completely different. No one is pushing to cut the 1 million green cards issues a year, and that would be happening is what you claim was even remotely true.
You're going to have to help me out - I don't see any connection between my comment and your response.
Culture may be opposed to it, but Federal policy is very much in favor of undocumented immigration.
> Most European countries have much more stringent immigration policies
Depends on your definition of stringent. You picked the one outlier - Switzerland - where apparently your canton gets to vote on whether you become a citizen. Or something crazy like that, idk.
Most European nations I'm familiar with let you become a permanent resident after residing legally for a certain number of years, and passing a language test. Then citizenship after some more years and more tests.
Is the US very different from that? Unless you're born in India or China...in which case, you might have an easier time in Europe.
Depends on your definition of stringent. You picked the one outlier - Switzerland - where apparently your canton gets to vote on whether you become a citizen. Or something crazy like that, idk.
Most European nations I'm familiar with let you become a permanent resident after residing legally for a certain number of years, and passing a language test. Then citizenship after some more years and more tests.
Is the US very different from that? Unless you're born in India or China...in which case, you might have an easier time in Europe.
> The United States has some of the most generous and charitable immigration policies of all countries on Earth.
Depends on who is immigrating, doesn't it? The Diversity Visa Lottery is outstanding, true. However, I consider Germany's Blue Card superior to H-1B: you can get a visa in a few weeks once you have a contract and a BS degree. For H-1B, not only you have lots of paperwork and processing time, you also have to win the spring quota lottery. Unless you work for a university, they have separate quota.
Depends on who is immigrating, doesn't it? The Diversity Visa Lottery is outstanding, true. However, I consider Germany's Blue Card superior to H-1B: you can get a visa in a few weeks once you have a contract and a BS degree. For H-1B, not only you have lots of paperwork and processing time, you also have to win the spring quota lottery. Unless you work for a university, they have separate quota.
> I've long been embarrassed that US immigration law so often errs on the side of xenophobia and cruelty.
That's the effect of being the single most desirable target for immigrants. If US immigration laws were any more lenient, it would be the most populous country on Earth already, way ahead of India and China.
That's the effect of being the single most desirable target for immigrants. If US immigration laws were any more lenient, it would be the most populous country on Earth already, way ahead of India and China.
factsarelolz(5)
> xenophobia and cruelty
this blames the reader of the comment indirectly, and calls to gather and act now to remedy these obvious and ugly moral traits
yet, most readers (like me) have had nothing to do with setting the rules for this system, nor implementing them. In addition, it is large companies that routinely exercise the actual restrictions.. and yes I have seen it directly.
Overall, this comment to flay and riddle the reader with guilt over this issue, is corrosive to unity.. and comes off as whiny and naive
this blames the reader of the comment indirectly, and calls to gather and act now to remedy these obvious and ugly moral traits
yet, most readers (like me) have had nothing to do with setting the rules for this system, nor implementing them. In addition, it is large companies that routinely exercise the actual restrictions.. and yes I have seen it directly.
Overall, this comment to flay and riddle the reader with guilt over this issue, is corrosive to unity.. and comes off as whiny and naive
Foreigners pay tons of money for the privilege of being at an American university, even state schools. Its really no comparison to in-state tuition. Its very good business for the universities. After that, the best find a way to remain in the country anyway, the rest are sent back through the ruthless H1B program.
Most people will transition from F-1 student visa OPT (Optional Practical Training) which has a multi-year STEM extension to H1B. Essentially you have 3 chances to get a H1B if you can find an employer willing to go through the process while you are already legally in the country.
I have never met any current or former H1B holder who didn't enter the program through this route.
I am a naturalized citizen who also followed this path.
I have never met any current or former H1B holder who didn't enter the program through this route.
I am a naturalized citizen who also followed this path.
The limit laws were put in place for the opposite reason of xenophobia and cruelty. It was to give immigrants from ALL countries a chance, and to provide a diverse group of new Americans. There is not going to ever be unlimited immigration, so knowing that, it is only fair to divide green cards among countries. Xenophobia would be if the USA only gave visas to Western Europeans and Australia/Canada. I remember in the 80s it was pretty common to find 'undocumented' Canadians and Irish. Your argument wouldn't stand up then as xenophobic USA not wanting those foreign Canadians and Irish, and it doesn't hold up now. The USA is has some of the largest legal immigration rates in the world.
It brings money, and spreads influence. Solves a different type of problem.
Universities like the cheap foreign research labor. Foreign students depress wages for American ones. Americans opt out and choose a different career.
Corruption all the way down, friends.
Corruption all the way down, friends.
During a downturn in the tech sector, while companies are boasting about "cutting the fat" in their workforce by the tens of thousands. I'd assume it's much easier to find a citizen than it was a few years ago
The companies admitting they over hired by thousands, also includes them claiming they needed immigrants they do not really need.
This[1] article estimates 2,000 of the 23,000 tech workers laid off in November 2022 had H-1B visas. According to the U.S approach to immigration we should all be prioritizing the 21,000 non-visa holders before we try getting people more jobs so they can keep their visa
https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/11/answers-for-h-1b-workers-w...