Sun Sued Over H1-B Workers

heli0 writes "The Boston Globe is reporting: 'A lawsuit filed yesterday in California alleges computer giant Sun Microsystems Inc. laid off thousands of American high-tech workers in order to replace them with younger, lower-paid engineers from India.' Could this be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back?"

Comments

Re:For us non-US'ians what is H1-B?

[www.sorehands.com]

Yes.

It was originally intended to allow employers to fill jobs when they cannot find legal residents to fill them.

To be able to use this, the employer must certify that they not only are unable to find an employee who is a legal resident. They are also supposed to certify that no terminations would happen to the non-H1b employees because of this hire (ie. termination/layoffs shortly after).

Re:For us non-US'ians what is H1-B?

[arpit]

That's right. This is the visa category under which a company can sponsor a foreign worker to work in a US based firm. This category is only for "skilled" labor.

The visa is typically valid for three years and renewable for only three more years after that. By that time if you haven't managed to complete your green card (permanent resident card) processing you have to leave the country - though I believe nowadays H1B visas can be extended beyond the usual 6 years in increments of one year provided your green card processing is in an advanced stage. I've been working on an H1B myself for the last 4 years.

Re:This happens everywhere.

[Skyshadow]

This sounds *very* framiliar. I used to work at an office in San Jose that was 95% Chinese nationals.

Besides it being a tough environment to work in (almost all communication was in Chinese, most of the engineers spoke little to no english and my Manderin sucks except for curses), it also meant that I ended up doing all the traveling even though it wasn't in my job description. It made me miserable -- I'm just not the sort of person who enjoys flying to client sites on 24 hour notice, working in someone else's machine room, being away from home alot and etc.

I stayed for the same reasons as you, but was eventually laid off for not coming in on Christmas day. Trust me: keep the job for now, but start looking around heavily. There are other jobs out there if you're willing to put in the work to look (aka, don't just hit Monster). I spent five months unemployed and burned through 98% of my savings, but it was worth every second and every penny to be happy at work again and have stabilized my relationships with my family.

Be careful of ripple effects...

[PatSand]

Interesting consequences either way:

1. Sun loses suit...

US companies have to hire us folks; competitive pressures force innovation to stay competitive or they die/merge/go bankrupt...

2. Sun wins suit/has it dismissed...

As more jobs move overseas, domestic markets dry up (who is working? who can buy?). Watching the US market die is not good for a company...will lead to global unemployment...

I have no qualms with new jobs being created overseas (hey, that's capitalism at it's best), but reducing headcount (and hence customers) in your biggest market is not too swift...

My vote: first option for existing jobs and get innovative. The US didn't get this dominant (economically) simply by copying what others do...we figured out how to do it better and new ways to do it (quick nod to Britain and the EC members for various technologies-like radar and jet engines-that we licensed and enhanced)...

And if a company can't innovate, should they be left to die? Maybe...

But one thing that must happen is that company need to focus more on their long-term survival instead of always pushing to improve short-term profits. This is a major driving force behind this exodus, and it will continue to kill many companies until this unhealthy view stops. Profit is essential for a company, but not at the expense of it's future.

How to change focus, you might ask? More R&D but also have management really monitor it; and have marketing do real market analysis, not sales and sales support.

Look back in the pre-80's business and economics textbooks...they had it right and it still is right...

What is dismaying...

[Naum]

...here is a good deal of the comment content defending the H1B program that simply skirts reality.

1. H1B visa holders are displacing American IT workers, regardless of whatever legal bullet point you wish to flash at me. It is a fact I can personally attest to it - twice, my job as an application support/develoopment programmer was supplanted by an H1B visa holder, and in one case my job was to train my replacement.
2. H1B workers replacing American programmers is wrong. How can anyone justify adding an American worker to the unemployment queue for the sake of a cheaper, more captive immigrant worker is beyond me. Nothing against the visa holder who are motivated to advance and excel in a profession they desire, but not while skilled Americans are shuffled out of jobs and/or forced to work for lower wages due to the addition of a contrived, more captive, more restricted IT worker poll.
3. The job advertisements for IT help reflect the sneaky, underhanded manner in which H1B holders are solicited to replace American workers. Instead of looking for bright, industrious individuals who are skilled and are eager to learn and tackle any task, a laundry list of skill set requirements and platform experience is dictated. Meanwhile, resumes and references from offshore can claim the H1B applicant possesses all of the necessary checklist prerequisites but there's no real way to authenticate it's indeed the truth. Again, from first hand experience, I can't tell you how many times the Indian offshore firm's pimp, er marketing guy, touted a prospective hire but then after seeing the guy/gal work for a while, it would be quite evident that the extent of this person's relevant experience was being handed a manual on the plane trip to America.
4. Once upon a time, way back when, before dot-bombs and the ubiquitous prevalence of Microsoft on the desktop, employers would recruit programmer talent from the business side to address shortages. Aspiring wanna-be coders who arduously studied for a new company role would be given a chance to break in and serve the company in a higher position (many coming from customer service roles). They would endure cumbersome training sessions on their own time, and only a few would be chosen from the pool of hopeful applicants. It was a win/win deal for both employee and employer. After the implemenation of H1B, this is no longer done. In fact, it's had the effect of dissuading those who've already trained extensively and would otherwise be automatically drawn to fulfill a beneficial role in a computing discipline.
5. Offshore migration of development/support work and importing of H1B temporary visa holders are not mutually exclusive trends. Any offshoring strategy, from the recent experience I've had in multiple instances, is heavily dependent upon immigrant liason agents, which utilize the H1B (or the L-visa) to augment the offshoring strategy. These lead level H1B holders interface between customer service/business user departments in the states and the team of juinor level members who remain in India (or the Phillipines, Malaysia, Mexico, etc. ...)
6. You can quote immigration law or cite study statistics about how H1B are paid prevailing wage and such, but the truth is that while for some this may be, for many others it is not - as other posters have detailed in comment posts here, enforcement of H1B stipulations is lax and/or non-existent -- many visa holders are raped wage wise as Company A contracts to Company B which serves as "the bodyshop". Company A spokesman can simply say how much Company B individual is paid is up to Company B. Company B may likely not even be U.S. based, or if they are, they've engaged in repeated violations of U.S. labor law (see Syntel history) without paying much of a penalty for their misdeeds. Perhaps many will discount my anecdotal experience, but I came across a number of Indian H1Bs who "disappeared" in the states because of their restrictive employment