Slashdot Mirror
How Outsourcing Companies Are Gaming the H-1B Visa System (nytimes.com)
New submitter shakah writes: The NY Times has a straightforward summary of how the H-1B Visa system is being gamed by companies inside and outside of the United States. Particularly interesting for me was their clarification on the argument that "VISA holders have to make prevailing wages, so they won't depress wages." Quoting: "Under federal rules, employers like TCS, Infosys and Wipro that have large numbers of H-1B workers in the United States are required to declare that they will not displace American workers. But the companies are exempt from that requirement if the H-1B workers are paid at least $60,000 a year. H-1B workers at outsourcing firms often receive wages at or slightly above $60,000, below what skilled American technology professionals tend to earn, so those firms can offer services to American companies at a lower cost, undercutting American workers."
How about H1-B Visa holders get paid 110% of the prevailing wage so that only the companies who seriously need a specialist and legitimately can't find any local talent will hire them. Also, give H1-B holders a ten year window to work in the U.S. that isn't dependent on staying with a single employer. If someone else hires away your H1-B employee, that's your company's problem.
Yep, in reality with this and even the farming jobs. The truth is "wages that Americans won't accept".
At competitive wages, you can always find people willing to do the job.
Now, show of hands ... who the hell is surprised to find out that this whole thing is being misused? Anyone?
The whole bloody point is to drive down wages and replace American workers.
Anybody who tells you otherwise is lying to you.
How anybody could possibly be shocked at this 'revelation' is mind boggling.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
In the farming, I have heard from people who live in those areas, the farm owners won't even hire an American, as they can demand minimum wage, but an illegal will work for dollars a day and can't complain.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
If U.S. companies don't want to hire U.S. workers, then these companies need to stop pretending, and just get the fuck out of the U.S altogether.
Companies don't want that, which is why the H1Bs work the way they do ... because that's what industry wanted.
If they're using an H1B to fill jobs they can't find people for, wages should be going up. Instead they're bringing in cheaper labor to drive down American salaries and displace Americans.
If those people had any ability to fight back or demand more, they just might. This way they're exactly what they're supposed to be .. cheap labor with fewer rights.
Seriously, this didn't happen by accident. It was bought and paid for by industry.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
How about a flat $50K/year tax payable straight to the gov't? Think of that as a tariff or duty. This would have several advantages:
- Simple & stupid, can't game a flat fee
- That kind of revenue wold keep the gov't interested in enforcing the program
- Makes the process of hiring offshore much more expensive. Remember, the idea is that hiring offshore is supposed to be a *last* resort, so $50K wouldn't deter someone who truly needed a particular skill.
- Makes it impractical to hire offshore lower-level employees, the kind that we already have plenty of and who are blatantly being replaced with foreigners just to save money.
"Why the hell do I pick your overpriced American company instead of the cheaper alternatives? Is it because you'll do a better job [slashdot.org]? Don't make me laugh."
So instead of choosing overpriced Americans (or possibly Europeans) you would choose somebody from India? Because they never have failed IT projects:
http://www.computerworlduk.com...
http://www.computerworld.com/a...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
The H1B program is broken in it's current form. It needs to be scrapped. Like other countries, e.g., Germany, the guest work visa program needs to be tightly monitored. No company should be allowed to flood the application process. No outsourcing or contractor companies should be allowed to apply, period. The reality is there is not shortage of STEM applicants. Plenty of qualified people. If you want to hire people from 3rd world countries, thereby undercutting labor rates, then locate your business there. You'll do more to help that country raise their standard of living by doing that. Not that you were truly interested in doing that.
As there is currently more visa applications than available visas, the solution can be very simple. Instead of lottery as it is done now, I would simply give visas to companies that plan to pay the highest salary. That would make companies to raise salaries if they really need applicants. That would also solve problems with definition of "prevailing wage" etc.
No sig today.
Is it only me who always reads H-1B Virus?
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Flat fee issue:
Do you really want to incentivize the government to have offshore workers by making them profit centers for the government itself? How is that an incentive to avoid destroying domestic jobs?
I'd think more like saying "H1B hires cost 3x the prevail wage for a job as determined by industry". Anyone not willing to pay up triple the cost can hire back the same folks they are firing now to save a buck. Anyone claiming this is not about companies saving a buck is being disingenuous. If there is truly not a single domestic worker able to fill the role, then paying extra for it should not be a problem. Looking at employment rates, and layoff/offshoring announcements I think these problems would fix itself pretty quickly given the right financial incentive.
Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
If there really were a shortage of tech workers, which I don't believe for a moment, the H1-B program is still about indentured servants. They should speed up/open up proper permanent residencies for these people so they come in with all the same rights and expectations of the Americans they are currently displacing. Holding them hostage to one company, training them to work well with Americans and then sending them home to lead off-shored teams is so bad for American workers that it's ridiculous.
Do you really want to incentivize the government to have offshore workers by making them profit centers for the government itself? How is that an incentive to avoid destroying domestic jobs?
You earmark the flat fee to go towards funding the enforcement of the H1B program rules. Any surplus goes to fund worker re-training programs.
This way enforcing the rules of the program is self-funding, and congress can't defund enforcement "because business" and the larger and more popular it is, the more enforcement can be funded.
Plus, you're basically forcing employers who "need" to hire cheap offshore help to also (provided there is a surplus, and at $50k per, there should be) fund worker retraining so the people needed to do the job can be found at home.
And this is different from indentured servitude how?
Just what is the end game to gutting the middle class, anyway?
Is the whole goal here just to have like 3 people who control 99.99999% of the wealth?
Surely once the the middle class is denuded, they'll start going for the "HENRYs" (high earners, not rich yet) and find a way to strip them of their earning potential and wealth, too.
At least in ancient Rome the emperors would stage feasts, festivals and games.
The job that they want an H1B for must be presented to the government and a $10k fee paid to the government to cover expenses. The government will interview qualified candidates and if the company does not take one of them, they do not get an H1B either. If no qualified candidates are found, the salary is raised until a qualified candidate is found, up to a maximum of 3 standard deviations from the average salary for the position. If there are still no qualified candidates, then you can have an H1b.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Yep, in reality with this and even the farming jobs. The truth is "wages that Americans won't accept".
Not just that. They're at wages that can't even be offered. For instance: Some (not all) of the social programs where H1-B workers aren't eligible don't require the employer contribution. So hiring a US worker - even at the same pay - is substantially more expensive.
One of the problems is that, in a very competitive environment where labor costs are large compared to differences in process costs, if ONE competitor takes advantage of a cheat and another does not, the non-cheater loses the competitive bids. Thus, if the regulations aren't enforced, all must cheat or go out of business.
One place you see this is in the construction industry, with the "undocumented" workers. US workers need not apply (and the jobs aren't offered.) Contractors can't stay in business employing them at mandated minimum wages, benefit levels, and safety standards (which they CAN get the government to enforce) when their competitors can hire workers for less and cheat on all of the above - which those not here legally can't try to get enforced without risking deportation, but can afford to live on (especially if their family is on public assistance).
So if the government is going to put these regulations in place, it must enforce them. The "Invisible Hand" will deliver a knockout punch to anybody who follows expensive, but unenforced, rules.
At competitive wages, you can always find people willing to do the job.
Yep. The trick is to keep the playing field level.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
And everyone will still go watch Star Wars The Force Awakens, making them more money, and nothing happens.
Beware of the Redittor who loans you a Sharpie.
At least in ancient Rome the emperors would stage feasts, festivals and games.
McDonald's, New Year's Eve, NFL.
The end game of capitalism? The French Revolution. You can only push people so far. There's a point where the laws of society and morality lose their meaning, usually soon after the masses start starving and suffering. At that point it doesn't matter how many guns or gates you have. You're not going to stop an angry mob who thinks they have nothing left to lose and view death as a reprieve from a tormented life.
~X~
Yes, but $60k/year is NOT the typical income for IT workers or software engineers. The median income for software engineers for example is around $92k.
From the other business owners that I know, I'm involved in a few now, they cite similar things. One owns a small computer repair shop with a few employees. Another, has maybe 500 employees in a bunch of fast food franchises, and the another owns a web hosting company - leases a few good sized cages in a couple of data centers in the US. All of them cite the same things. We talk about this extensively. I chose those few to mention specifically because their disparate. I know law firm owners, a guy who has a medical practice, etc... It could, easily, be the industries that I'm most familiar with or you're being lied to by your bosses. Take a look at some corporate filings for publicly traded businesses.
I'm a bit lazy so you can either search or believe me or wait until I am less lazy but I think the labor costs, as an itemized expense under overhead, is something like 17% averaged across the entire work force? Something like that, at any rate. Some higher, some lower, of course. The last time I found and cited the stats they were from BLS as I recall. It was not that long ago. So, while I did shunt the expense (included them as a cost) so doesn't every other business. You're not just buying parts when you buy a car, you're paying the labor also. It's a circular thing, I guess. The people I employed, for instance, paid higher taxes and paid a proportion greater than most to the municipalities that got improvements through their labor.
All-in-all, it wasn't that huge of an expense in the debit column and under the overhead header. I believe it's another 2-3% for benefits. We probably spent more on perks and office supplies than we spent on a secretary and even those were paid well. Bonuses don't come under labor costs, they're itemized separately. Those were a bit much but it is important to remember that without them you'd have no business at all. Paying bonuses for quality work is a very good motivator and allows people to share in the success of the company.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Can someone tell me WHY we need such a system at all? I doubt that we are importing only once-in-100-years mega-geniuses, so is it worth all the cost and problems and cheating and vigilance and unemployment? I don't see how...