H1B Visas banned under Tarp

[halik]

Originally posted by: z0mb13
halik please find a PHD graduate that is working at undergraduate salaries.

That was a hypo to illustrate my point, here's some research that show the prevailing wage shortcomings:
Text

Plus be honest - your own salary requirements would be higher if you had a green card as opposed to H1B.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: ajf3

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

You folks saying, "good, keep those foreigners out of American jobs," you go find me 10 competent and experienced US-born ABAP programmers. In my area/willing to relocate to my area. Do you even know what the hell ABAP is? I don't care if there are 100 out of work Americans applying for that job; if they can't DO it, they're no use and you damage the economy by applying laws that mean a company has to hire underqualified or non-qualified workers.

<--- American libertarian who wants as low a US unemployment rate as is reasonably possible

ABAP

ABAP is one of the many application-specific fourth-generation languages (4GLs) first developed in the 1980s. It was originally the report language for SAP R/2, a platform that enabled large corporations to build mainframe business applications for materials management and financial and management accounting.

customers can develop custom reports and interfaces with ABAP programming. The language is fairly easy to learn for programmers but it is not a tool for direct use by non-programmers. Good programming skills, including knowledge of relational database design and preferably also of object-oriented concepts, are required to create ABAP programs.

Spend some of that h1b layer/application money training a US IT professional in ABAP.

Sounds like your average 'code monkey' is only a few months away from being a competent ABAP programmer given the training - and the opportunity.

For the record, we've now changed the argument.

Initial argument: "there are plenty of qualified US workers; we shouldn't be hiring H1Bs"
Current argument: "well, there may not be enough qualified US workers but the companies should be training them"

The current argument becomes less a matter of fact and more a matter of opinion, so we won't have a clear-cut answer emerge.

My opinion differs from yours; I do not think it is a company's responsibility to train US workers if there are no US workers available. I think it's the responsibility of the educational system and the worker him/herself to become qualified for a job. It's nice if the employer wants or is willing to train, but I do not think that should be a legal requirement.

As far as the facts of ABAP, the average code monkey is not just a few months away from competence given training and opportunity. Hopefully my authority on this is enough for you, since I'm speaking from firsthand knowledge and your background is a once-over of the wiki (not trying to be pretentious here, I just have more visibility into the situation). As evidence, I offer this: if it were so simple and because it pays so well, wouldn't more code monkeys learn it and get those jobs? If you have the chance to take 4-6 months of classes and change your starting salary from $50k to $80k, wouldn't you? I submit that getting ABAP training and experience is much more complicated than suggested by the wiki article.

On top of that, there is definitely a difference to an employer between hiring an experienced ABAPer and training a new one. If you were hiring a Java code monkey, would it matter to you whether they were fresh out of school or had 7 years of experience? It definitely should.

So rather than blame the employers for hiring the only qualified employees they can find (and they typically do soak the market of American workers before they turn to H1B in this situation, since it's extremely difficult to get one of those H1B slots allocated to your company) I suggest that we talk about how the American educational system can better prepare US workers for these jobs.

 

[aceO07]

From my experience, an H1B did get paid less and it was very easy to game the system. I'd like to not only keep the knowledge inside the USA, but also keep most of the money here too. This is merely my experience, so it might vary from others.

 

[piasabird]

The reason the talent you want in the IT field is so hard to find, is that companies just refuse to offer the good jobs to US Citizens and do not even try to find US Citizen help. So no US Citizens are even enrolling in these fields because the stupid companies will not offer Americans a Job. They shoot themselves in the foot and then complain to the government for help. Let them instead just offer scholarships to Americans.

 

[blahblah99]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: blahblah99

Originally posted by: Hacp
There are already plenty of engineers, scientists, and business people that were laid off. Send those foreigners back to their countries and lets hire American workers.

So they can sit on their asses can contribute minimally to the company?

H1B employees are hired because of a) talent, or b) to fulfill a position others don't want to fill at a given salary.

Actually, US workers are one of the most productive in the world.

What productivity?

1) If productivity is so great, why does has the US trade deficit exploded over the recent years to new records?

2) If productivity is so great, why is debt surging to new records?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Hacp
I agree. We should give these H1B guys a plane ticket out of the country asap. All companies ever do with H1bs is hire them for 1/2 of what an American worker would work for.

that's bullshit. we pay our h1b workers market rate plus we have to pay extra for legal and relo.

If you were really paying market rate you would have been able to find US candidates without adding overhead of sponsoring H1B application.

Originally posted by: JS80
we hire h1b because of the lack of talent in the market, NOT because they are cheaper.

There is no lack of talent on the market. You're simply not offering competitive salary to attract skills you need.

Originally posted by: JS80
we already lost 2 h1bs because they got even higher offers elsewhere.

See above, case in point: you're paying so little you already lost two of your H1B's.


This entire post by JS80 is why people are against H1B visas. First they can't find US candidates because they do not offer competitive salary, so they turn to H1B. Then, when they hire H1B they still don't pay them enough because they leave somewhere.


halik said it best. There is no lack of candidates. However, there is a lack of candidates at the price companies want to pay.

What part of what I wrote doesn't make sense to you? We don't hire based on price, we hire based on talent. We pay our H1bs the same as our non-H1bs. And the h1b software and algo engineers interview MUCH better than non-h1bs.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Hacp
I agree. We should give these H1B guys a plane ticket out of the country asap. All companies ever do with H1bs is hire them for 1/2 of what an American worker would work for.

that's bullshit. we pay our h1b workers market rate plus we have to pay extra for legal and relo.

If you were really paying market rate you would have been able to find US candidates without adding overhead of sponsoring H1B application.

Originally posted by: JS80
we hire h1b because of the lack of talent in the market, NOT because they are cheaper.

There is no lack of talent on the market. You're simply not offering competitive salary to attract skills you need.

Originally posted by: JS80
we already lost 2 h1bs because they got even higher offers elsewhere.

See above, case in point: you're paying so little you already lost two of your H1B's.


This entire post by JS80 is why people are against H1B visas. First they can't find US candidates because they do not offer competitive salary, so they turn to H1B. Then, when they hire H1B they still don't pay them enough because they leave somewhere.


halik said it best. There is no lack of candidates. However, there is a lack of candidates at the price companies want to pay.

What part of what I wrote doesn't make sense to you? We don't hire based on price, we hire based on talent. We pay our H1bs the same as our non-H1bs. And the h1b software and algo engineers interview MUCH better than non-h1bs.

Do you want me to spell it out for you? Everybody hires based on talent, just not everybody pays for it. You claimed you were paying competitive/market rate to your H1B's. Two of them left. This means that you were not paying competitive/market rate to them because if you were they wouldn't have left.

 

[Mani]

Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

 

[Taejin]

Originally posted by: Hacp
There are already plenty of engineers, scientists, and business people that were laid off. Send those foreigners back to their countries and lets hire American workers.

screw that, I'd rather America hire the best and the brightest in the world.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

THIS. For all of you arguing against H1Bs, there are some legitimate arguments out there that the H1B program is not in employers/America's best interest. Focus your arguments on those and let's have a more productive discussion. Hammering on the "cheap labor" idea gets us nowhere. It's untrue and it detracts from the real discussion.

For example:

Are some of you anti-H1B people proposing that the unemployment rate in the US should be 0% before we start bringing in foreign workers to meet demand? Does that mean we owe jobs to the dumbest and least qualified American employees before utilizing the brightest and most qualified foreign employees?

 

[da loser]

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

i don't see how this can be true.

i'm for H1b visas, but clearly it's to achieve a lower price.

i just think a lower price is good for america. it's simple supply and demand.

say there's x supply of americans. well if there are x+1 companies, then that +1 company is going to have to offer more than one of the x companies to attract one of those americans.

all a h1b visa does is add additional supply, thus lowering the cost. which in turn lowers theprice of goods from that company, and makes america more efficient. giving americans/world cheaper goods.

 

[EagleKeeper]

H1B was intended to allow temporary increase in skilled high demand/low supply areas.

Employers have found that they can manipulate the system and bring in labor to fill unfilled slots.

If there are people qualified to fill the slot, yet they bring in overseas labor; what is the benefit? $$$

So save $$, either benefits/overhead must be less or the payroll cost must be less.

To create the unfilled slots, they either have a high demand for employees and/or they have made it so the local market is not interested.

It is then cheaper to bring in overseas labor via H1B than bring in US labor from outside the local market.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
H1B was intended to allow temporary increase in skilled high demand/low supply areas.

Employers have found that they can manipulate the system and bring in labor to fill unfilled slots.

If there are people qualified to fill the slot, yet they bring in overseas labor; what is the benefit? $$$

So save $$, either benefits/overhead must be less or the payroll cost must be less.

To create the unfilled slots, they either have a high demand for employees and/or they have made it so the local market is not interested.

It is then cheaper to bring in overseas labor via H1B than bring in US labor from outside the local market.

Where is your evidence that there are qualified people to fill the slots being filled from overseas?

In my experience, using the ABAP example I mentioned earlier, companies spend 6-8 months trying to find a candidate, usually jacking their compa-ratio to 100% (if you don't know what a compa-ratio is you aren't in the right place to be arguing about over or underpaying employees) and offering new hire bonuses and relocation.

After nationwide searches, frequently employing headhunters to talk people who weren't job-searching into considering a move, when they fail to find an employee they wind up paying a specialist to file paperwork for an H1B and wait 10 months, looking nationwide all the while, for that single day of opportunity where they MAY be granted one of the few slots available.

So now we're talking about 18 months where the work this person should be doing is going undone, or overloading a coworker to the point they hate the company and want to quit.

SOMETIMES THERE IS NO LOCAL MARKET! Sometimes there is no NATIONAL market. I know when you're thinking about software developers it seems like they are a dime a dozen, but run of the mill devs aren't the ones hired via H1B. There are specialties out there where the unemployment rate is zero, and I hear folks proposing that we basically prevent companies who need those specialties from hiring at all.

85-90% of the time, if you prevent these companies from hiring H1B candidates, they will not be hiring anyone at all. (I will not contend that all companies use the program appropriately, thus the leftover 10-15%) You are not adding US jobs by shutting down H1B, you're just crippling healthy companies.

Let's talk educational system if you want to get more jobs for Americans. If we want people to work we need to train them to the job. Google ABAP training and see what you get... Chennai, Hyderabad, etc. The people with the skills come from the places that train to those skills.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: da loser

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

i don't see how this can be true.

i'm for H1b visas, but clearly it's to achieve a lower price.

i just think a lower price is good for america. it's simple supply and demand.

say there's x supply of americans. well if there are x+1 companies, then that +1 company is going to have to offer more than one of the x companies to attract one of those americans.

all a h1b visa does is add additional supply, thus lowering the cost. which in turn lowers theprice of goods from that company, and makes america more efficient. giving americans/world cheaper goods.

The second half of what your say isn't correct. Efficiency in free trade comes from comparative advantage and specialization therein.

Since H1B affect the sector where we have the comparative advantage in, there are no efficiency gains - it's a zero sum game. It's merely redistribution of surplus/wealth. All the costs are bourne by the labor by the means of wage depression, where as the benefits go in part to capital owners (shareholder in the company) and back to labor as forms of cheaper good. So labor loses 1 and gets back 0.5

Like I said before, efficiency would only work if you'd free up resources from industry where you don't have camparative advantage and move them into the one where you do. (e.g.manufacturing shoes vs. manufacturing carbon nanotubes)

 

[BigDH01]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: da loser

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

i don't see how this can be true.

i'm for H1b visas, but clearly it's to achieve a lower price.

i just think a lower price is good for america. it's simple supply and demand.

say there's x supply of americans. well if there are x+1 companies, then that +1 company is going to have to offer more than one of the x companies to attract one of those americans.

all a h1b visa does is add additional supply, thus lowering the cost. which in turn lowers theprice of goods from that company, and makes america more efficient. giving americans/world cheaper goods.

The second half of what your say isn't correct. Efficiency in free trade comes from comparative advantage and specialization there in. Since H1B affect the sector where we have the comparative advantage in, there are no efficiency gains - it's a zero sum game. It's merely redistribution of surplus/wealth. All the costs are bourne by the labor by the means of wage depression, where as the benefits go in part to capital holders (shareholder in the company) as back to labor as forms of cheaper good. So labor loses 1 and gets back 0.5

Spoken like someone who's actually spent time learning about H-O and trade barriers.

Of course, we must also question the utility of training foreigners in the US and sending them back home. Eventually, we'll lose that comparative advantage. Actually, that's incorrect, we're going to eventually lose it anyway, but training people here and sending them home might speed up that process, some might argue.

Then the comparative advantage will quickly become only capital.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: da loser

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

i don't see how this can be true.

i'm for H1b visas, but clearly it's to achieve a lower price.

i just think a lower price is good for america. it's simple supply and demand.

say there's x supply of americans. well if there are x+1 companies, then that +1 company is going to have to offer more than one of the x companies to attract one of those americans.

all a h1b visa does is add additional supply, thus lowering the cost. which in turn lowers theprice of goods from that company, and makes america more efficient. giving americans/world cheaper goods.

The second half of what your say isn't correct. Efficiency in free trade comes from comparative advantage and specialization there in. Since H1B affect the sector where we have the comparative advantage in, there are no efficiency gains - it's a zero sum game. It's merely redistribution of surplus/wealth. All the costs are bourne by the labor by the means of wage depression, where as the benefits go in part to capital holders (shareholder in the company) as back to labor as forms of cheaper good. So labor loses 1 and gets back 0.5

Spoken like someone who's actually spent time learning about H-O and trade barriers.

Of course, we must also question the utility of training foreigners in the US and sending them back home. Eventually, we'll lose that comparative advantage. Actually, that's incorrect, we're going to eventually lose it anyway, but training people here and sending them home might speed up that process, some might argue.

Then the comparative advantage will quickly become only capital.

BS, MA in Economics

I'm not exactly sure whether it's the people's education or our system of higher education that creates the comparative advantage...

I don't think Heckscher Ohlin is particularily applicable in this case, I was just going off the regular Ricardian model. IMO HO is great for talking about 19th century and going OOOH I can use lots of calculus to show outcomes of world under unreasonable assumptions, but that's about it. The fact that it assumes constant technology for both countries makes it inapplicable in this case...

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

THIS. For all of you arguing against H1Bs, there are some legitimate arguments out there that the H1B program is not in employers/America's best interest. Focus your arguments on those and let's have a more productive discussion. Hammering on the "cheap labor" idea gets us nowhere. It's untrue and it detracts from the real discussion.

For example:

Are some of you anti-H1B people proposing that the unemployment rate in the US should be 0% before we start bringing in foreign workers to meet demand? Does that mean we owe jobs to the dumbest and least qualified American employees before utilizing the brightest and most qualified foreign employees?

If there are tens of thousands of hard working Americans being laid off from companies like Merick and Microsoft, we need to save their jobs first before allowing any more H1b workers. If the H1bs want to come and live in the US, I'm fine with that. They just need to move to the back of the line. It's 10 million+ deep.

 

[Socio]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with adapting an Americans first policy especially in these economical times. This will put more Americans back to work and send this foreign talent home where they are needed a lot more.

I think they should take it a big step further and there should be a moratorium on work permits and green cards. Importing workers should be a last resort now thus there is no logical reason not to shut the spicket of for a while.

Besides that we cannot continue to be the world?s easy out, all these immigrants need to go home/stay home and work to make their own country better or their countries never will be and the world will never be.

They need to be living their own dream not Americas.

 

[thegimp03]

Originally posted by: tweaker2

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Sacrilege

Originally posted by: Jabbernyx

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i still say it doesn't make a lick of sense to give people visas to be students, let them study here, and then tell them they can't work here.

This. And we're funding their educations (postgrads)! Why wouldn't we want to reap the benefit of our investment?
Obviously, this doesn't apply to the case of sub-standard code monkeys that companies try to ship in, which is what seems to be brought up everytime H1Bs are discussed on AT.

Look at this pure unadulterated racism. :|

You'd think after the "Macaca" incident and the recent New York Post cartoon, bigots like you would have a little shame. But instead you bring out your tired racism.

The word monkey should never be used to describe another human being. :brokenheart:

Get the head out of that ass of yours. Code monkey is a term used for any entry level coder regardless of nationality or skin color. Because much of the shit they code for is something a monkey can do. Somebody of low skill level.

:thumbsup: :laugh:

This is just about the most sneakiest way that I've ever seen being used to insult and berate monkeys.

ROFL, talk about putting Sacrilege in his place.

On topic though, I agree with this. These companies need to be hiring american workers. I'm not putting down people who're here on visas, but it's not fair to hire them over a qualified american candidate when a lot of them are probably shipping some of the dollars they make out of country and not throwing them back into the american economy.

 

[nobodyknows]

If we can bring in 20 million illegals to work cheap I fail to understand what the fuss about H1B's is all about?? What goes around, comes around.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

THIS. For all of you arguing against H1Bs, there are some legitimate arguments out there that the H1B program is not in employers/America's best interest. Focus your arguments on those and let's have a more productive discussion. Hammering on the "cheap labor" idea gets us nowhere. It's untrue and it detracts from the real discussion.

For example:

Are some of you anti-H1B people proposing that the unemployment rate in the US should be 0% before we start bringing in foreign workers to meet demand? Does that mean we owe jobs to the dumbest and least qualified American employees before utilizing the brightest and most qualified foreign employees?

This is unequivocally wrong. Anyone that says US companies aren't leveraging H1Bs due to reduced cost doesn't have enough experience at a decision-making level.

I can't name names, but I can tell you through my company I have direct experience with this cost-reducing measure at some of the largest financial companies in the US (some of which went belly up recently), software companies, etc. In some cases, there were specific mandates to leverage H1Bs due to reduced cost and nothing more; it was so specific in fact that group directors would have to submit a justification to use on-shore (and thus, in most cases, more expensive) resources that was reviewed by a vendor board.

In other cases, I've witnessed first hand the exploitation that H1B resources have suffered. My wife was an H1B for years, my brother-in-law is an H1B that works with Wipro, another family member is with Satyam, still others with Hexaware. I'm sometimes too big of a loud mouth on these forums, but the manner in which it's handled has always frustrated me. New grads are brought into the fold, thrown onto projects at large US companies and billed at a blended rate (a strategy used by a lot of firms; a lot of times it makes sense, other times it's to obfuscate the balancing of resources) which still undercuts many US firms by 10% or more.

And I'm sure you're familiar with these practically invisible Indian "companies" which do nothing more than hold H1Bs on behalf of large companies that don't want the stigma of H1B workers. If not, then you're missing a lot of the picture. These H1B workers are often brought onto projects using fabricated backgrounds, billed at a rate sometimes 400% or more than the rate they actually receive. These H1Bs are too afraid of losing their status to contradict their employers.

This isn't tin-foil hat business. This is the way the industry works. The program has some serious problems, and India recognizes this as well. In India itself you see a lot of "finishing schools" where new grads are thrown into extra training to make it appear as though they have the experience the company says they do. In some cases, these finishing schools are as crooked as the companies, in other cases they offer a legitimate service.

I hate to offer such a negative contradiction. I'm a large supporter of the H1B program, but the attractive cost-reduction has led myopic company leaders into exclusive contracts to benefit their near-term financial goals while missing the bigger picture.

 

[z0mb13]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

THIS. For all of you arguing against H1Bs, there are some legitimate arguments out there that the H1B program is not in employers/America's best interest. Focus your arguments on those and let's have a more productive discussion. Hammering on the "cheap labor" idea gets us nowhere. It's untrue and it detracts from the real discussion.

For example:

Are some of you anti-H1B people proposing that the unemployment rate in the US should be 0% before we start bringing in foreign workers to meet demand? Does that mean we owe jobs to the dumbest and least qualified American employees before utilizing the brightest and most qualified foreign employees?

This is unequivocally wrong. Anyone that says US companies aren't leveraging H1Bs due to reduced cost doesn't have enough experience at a decision-making level.

I can't name names, but I can tell you through my company I have direct experience with this cost-reducing measure at some of the largest financial companies in the US (some of which went belly up recently), software companies, etc. In some cases, there were specific mandates to leverage H1Bs due to reduced cost and nothing more; it was so specific in fact that group directors would have to submit a justification to use on-shore (and thus, in most cases, more expensive) resources that was reviewed by a vendor board.

In other cases, I've witnessed first hand the exploitation that H1B resources have suffered. My wife was an H1B for years, my brother-in-law is an H1B that works with Wipro, another family member is with Satyam, still others with Hexaware. I'm sometimes too big of a loud mouth on these forums, but the manner in which it's handled has always frustrated me. New grads are brought into the fold, thrown onto projects at large US companies and billed at a blended rate (a strategy used by a lot of firms; a lot of times it makes sense, other times it's to obfuscate the balancing of resources) which still undercuts many US firms by 10% or more.

And I'm sure you're familiar with these practically invisible Indian "companies" which do nothing more than hold H1Bs on behalf of large companies that don't want the stigma of H1B workers. If not, then you're missing a lot of the picture. These H1B workers are often brought onto projects using fabricated backgrounds, billed at a rate sometimes 400% or more than the rate they actually receive. These H1Bs are too afraid of losing their status to contradict their employers.

This isn't tin-foil hat business. This is the way the industry works. The program has some serious problems, and India recognizes this as well. In India itself you see a lot of "finishing schools" where new grads are thrown into extra training to make it appear as though they have the experience the company says they do. In some cases, these finishing schools are as crooked as the companies, in other cases they offer a legitimate service.

I hate to offer such a negative contradiction. I'm a large supporter of the H1B program, but the attractive cost-reduction has led myopic company leaders into exclusive contracts to benefit their near-term financial goals while missing the bigger picture.

Good post. I agree that sometimes H1B is exploited by these companies to lower their costs. However the issue lies in the enforcement of the law. The immigration department should be smarter and MUCH more selective in granting the H1B.
A petition for a entry level software engineer making 35K a year should probably be rejected, but a petition for a PHD researcher under grants should be granted instantly. Heck even the PHD guy should get a green card right after he graduates.

US should be way wore lenient to international students that finish their educations here, especially from highly desirable fields which are lacking in qualified workers. Masters and PHD graduates should even get their green cards instantly. Most of the master or phd international students are here on a scholarship (also a portion of the undergraduates). They cannot get a loan to finance their degrees, so these are some of the best of the best people that are graduating. It is no brainer to give them permission to stay in the states if they want to.

 

[z0mb13]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: z0mb13
halik please find a PHD graduate that is working at undergraduate salaries.

That was a hypo to illustrate my point, here's some research that show the prevailing wage shortcomings:
Text

Plus be honest - your own salary requirements would be higher if you had a green card as opposed to H1B.

During my H1B petition the company actually had to increase my salary by a bit so that it matches the prevaling wage for my salary back then

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Mani
Let's put one myth to rest definitively - H1Bs are NOT used as a "lower cost alternative" to US labor.

THIS. For all of you arguing against H1Bs, there are some legitimate arguments out there that the H1B program is not in employers/America's best interest. Focus your arguments on those and let's have a more productive discussion. Hammering on the "cheap labor" idea gets us nowhere. It's untrue and it detracts from the real discussion.

For example:

Are some of you anti-H1B people proposing that the unemployment rate in the US should be 0% before we start bringing in foreign workers to meet demand? Does that mean we owe jobs to the dumbest and least qualified American employees before utilizing the brightest and most qualified foreign employees?

This is unequivocally wrong. Anyone that says US companies aren't leveraging H1Bs due to reduced cost doesn't have enough experience at a decision-making level.

I can't name names, but I can tell you through my company I have direct experience with this cost-reducing measure at some of the largest financial companies in the US (some of which went belly up recently), software companies, etc. In some cases, there were specific mandates to leverage H1Bs due to reduced cost and nothing more; it was so specific in fact that group directors would have to submit a justification to use on-shore (and thus, in most cases, more expensive) resources that was reviewed by a vendor board.

In other cases, I've witnessed first hand the exploitation that H1B resources have suffered. My wife was an H1B for years, my brother-in-law is an H1B that works with Wipro, another family member is with Satyam, still others with Hexaware. I'm sometimes too big of a loud mouth on these forums, but the manner in which it's handled has always frustrated me. New grads are brought into the fold, thrown onto projects at large US companies and billed at a blended rate (a strategy used by a lot of firms; a lot of times it makes sense, other times it's to obfuscate the balancing of resources) which still undercuts many US firms by 10% or more.

And I'm sure you're familiar with these practically invisible Indian "companies" which do nothing more than hold H1Bs on behalf of large companies that don't want the stigma of H1B workers. If not, then you're missing a lot of the picture. These H1B workers are often brought onto projects using fabricated backgrounds, billed at a rate sometimes 400% or more than the rate they actually receive. These H1Bs are too afraid of losing their status to contradict their employers.

This isn't tin-foil hat business. This is the way the industry works. The program has some serious problems, and India recognizes this as well. In India itself you see a lot of "finishing schools" where new grads are thrown into extra training to make it appear as though they have the experience the company says they do. In some cases, these finishing schools are as crooked as the companies, in other cases they offer a legitimate service.

I hate to offer such a negative contradiction. I'm a large supporter of the H1B program, but the attractive cost-reduction has led myopic company leaders into exclusive contracts to benefit their near-term financial goals while missing the bigger picture.

Again, you have to clearly distinguish H1B hired by the Indian out sourcing companies, and those H1B who studied in the US, hired by local US companies, and have plan to be a US permanent resident or citizen.

Of course when companies hire Indian outsourcing companies, the only reason is the cost reduction. And to bring people into America to meet all the demand, Indian companies abuse all the H1B loopholes they can, there is no doubt about it. They do H1B in large number, 7 Indian companies accounted for majority of the H1B applications, and they caused the quota to be used up in the first day they are available.

But different from the Indian outsourcing companies, companies like Microsoft, Google, and other local American companies hire foreign student from top engineering and business schools directly. Those hires are no different from American hires in term of salary. The reason they are hired is because there are not that many talents from top engineering or business schools, everyone of those top students are with multiple job offers right after graduation. And no you cannot replace those top talents with average joes looking for average jobs.

Anyway, I ask people here to understand the differences on how H1B is used by different companies before bashing every single H1B holders as though there is no difference. It would be a big loss for America if they stop legal use of H1B program at local American companies simply because outsourcing companies are misusing the program.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: z0mb13

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Hacp
I agree. We should give these H1B guys a plane ticket out of the country asap. All companies ever do with H1bs is hire them for 1/2 of what an American worker would work for.

that's bullshit. we pay our h1b workers market rate plus we have to pay extra for legal and relo. we hire h1b because of the lack of talent in the market, NOT because they are cheaper. we already lost 2 h1bs because they got even higher offers elsewhere.

And did that loss bankrupt your company? I'm guessing no. Now you can go hire two Americans to do the same job. We are after all in the United States of America. Americans come first.

are you that dense? go read your comments again before you post

There are plenty of qualified American technology workers out there. Hell, we probably have some of the best in the world working for companies like Google and Microsoft! If you want to hire them, you'll simply have to give them a better offer than what they're making now.

Of course, most companies don't want to do that if they have a cheaper option available... hence the popularity of H1-B workers. My hunch is that they wouldn't be nearly as popular if there was a $100,000 application fee to get one... maybe they should make that part of the next stimulus package. At that price, it might actually become cheaper recruit some top US talent, or to train existing employees instead of laying them off after replacing their position.