Slashdot Mirror
What is the Tech Jobs Situation in Late 2004?
CareerConfused asks: "Today I came across an ad in the NY Times, put out by Microsoft, Micron, Level 3 (among others) that claimed that the H-1B visa quota for FY2005 has already expired (it claims the quota expired the first day of FY2005, which started just about a month back). OK. On the one hand, we have
stories of techies not finding jobs; and on the other, we have stories from businesses which claim that lack of H1s is killing their business, as well as public advocacy (like that ad in NYT). So, what is it? Are we in another boom, with jobs going a-begging and companies requiring more H1s to fill them? How come I haven't noticed this in the form of a fatter paycheck (or an Aeron chair, or a fooseball table in the cubicle)?" What have you experienced in your searches for technology-based jobs? Is it still hard to sell your hard-earned skills or are things looking up?
While its one thing to claim that the lack of H1Bs is killing your business because Americans don't want to move to Fort Wayne, Indiana. It's quite another to say that you can't find a job in Silicon Valley. What's needed is an overall view of how tech jobs are doing across the country. What areas are in desperate need of technical skills and what areas are suffering from a shortage of jobs?
In the Bay Area, at least, the three datapoints I have are: :) ); :)
1. Google's still screaming for people to join them (well, OK, they then axe highly-competent people during their interview process, but I'm sure it's for the best
2. When I was looking for a job in late August, I ended up in a competitive bidding situation between two companies;
3. The company for which I work now (which has a fabulous environment, IMHO), is looking to hire people, so far with no great success. Of course, we're also looking for pretty decent people
It's getting better, I think.
Not quite that simple. If you're an H-1B you do have the nasty stick of "if we fire you you have to go home" but they can't pay you less than the going rate for a given job. Part of the application process is telling the Department of Labor the details of the job for which you're hiring, and they tell you the minimum you're allowed to pay for it. You then must pay the applicant what you already offered him, or what the DoL specified -- whichever is higher.
Of course the system is gamed, but it's not as if there are no mechanisms to prevent sweatshop hiring.
A friend of mine came back from an eight-month backpacking romp through Europe recently. While that sounds like a lot of fun (and is, if you have the time and money to spend on it), it's not the best move for your career when your career is in the ever-changing world of tech. Despite being a talented interface designer, she came back home to find that the software and methods she was using was no longer the standard - new techniques had been developed and better ways of managing content had presented themselves. Basically she came home to find the tech playing field had moved on without her, and was unable to find a job as nice as the one she left.
Solution: retrain! She went out to some temp agencies and farmed her resume around, then taught herself Visio when a client requested it. She spent the last few weeks down in the District building contacts and making money while working on a Post Office project. If you want jobs, you can find jobs - just don't expect people to throw money into your lap as per the bubble-days of the 90s.
For those not in the know, a security clearance is a pre-punched meal-ticket - and you don't have to be in DC or Virginia. If you're able to find work with someone who's willing to sponsor your security clearance process, and you've no particular qualms about working for The Man, take it. A Secret clearance will keep you employed anywhere in the nation. A Top Secret brings a higher salary and even more options to choose from, though laying hands on one is sometimes more a matter of fate than desire.
They found out that you can either hire a domestic techie for 50-80k/yr or hire an imported techie for 25-35k/yr.
If that's happening, then you already have legal options without needing new legislation for tariff's on imported labor: H-1B's are, by law, supposed to be paid in line with US workers -- one of the hurdles in getting a H-1B is getting the state's department of labor to sign off that the wage level is kosher. Most of the stories you here about dramatically underpaid foreign H1-B's turn out to be urban legends.
I was a H1-B for six years, and I was always paid in line with U.S. workers, both at my company and in the industry in general.
"Just once, I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets." -- The Brigadier, Dr. Who
Dude, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. How you got modded up to a 5 is beyond my imagination.
If you're gonna shoot out numbers at least endeaver to make them remotely accurate. The visa caps varied over the last six years:
1998 65000
1999 115000
2000 195000
2001 195000
2002 195000
2003 65000
2004 65000
This gives us a total of 895,000 total H1Bs over the last six years. I'll be generous and use your figure that only 60% were IT specific, which gives us: 537,000. Now, you idiotically compared your total figure to the number of people in this country to come to the conclusion that your 270k number (which I've already proven is completely wrong) is statistically insignificant. Your comparison is retarded. That 300 million includes people who don't even try to work, like INFANTS for example.
Why don't you compare it to the number of IT workers in the country? Here, let me do it for you: there are roughly 3.3 million IT workers and 537,000 H1Bs which gives us a percentage of (537k/3.3m * 100) 16.2%. Hmmm...16.2 percent doesn't seem insignificant to me. For example, if I told you not to go into a specific bar because you had a 16.2% chance of having your head blown off, would you? Didn't think so.
Oh, and before you tell me that these people are out in 3 years, think again. It costs them all of about $500 to have a lawyer get them a 3 year extension.
Anyway, just wanted to say STFU about shit you know nothing about. Oh, and the moderators should be ashamed for modding this idiot up.
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
Here's how things have changed over the past couple of years, at least for one Silicon Valley company that I used to work for...
Two years ago, the company laid off a few programmers, then six months later, gave everyone a 7% paycut so that they didn't have to lay off more programmers. People took the paycuts in stride.
A year ago, many of the people who took paycuts, left the company. The company hired people to replace them. Lots of qualified candidates applied for the open positions, but the company actually had to pay the new people more than the people who had left the company. It took about two weeks to fill the positions.
This past year, the company saw a huge upswing in business and needed to hire more people. The were two hiring phases, one in the spring and one in the fall. In the spring, there were lots of candidates again, but few qualified ones. The ones that were hired demanded a salary that was ~10% greater than people hired for the same position a year before. It took about six weeks to fill the positions. In the fall hiring, there were far fewer candidates and very few qualified ones. Salaries were still about 10% higher than the previous year. Not all positions have been filled after eight weeks.