Slashdot Mirror


Congress Will Consider Proposal To Raise H-1B Minimum Wage To $100,000 (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: President-elect Donald Trump is just a week away from taking office. From the start of his campaign, he has promised big changes to the US immigration system. For both Trump's advisers and members of Congress, the H-1B visa program, which allows many foreign workers to fill technology jobs, is a particular focus. One major change to that system is already under discussion: making it harder for companies to use H-1B workers to replace Americans by simply giving the foreign workers a raise. The "Protect and Grow American Jobs Act," introduced last week by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. and Scott Peters, D-Calif., would significantly raise the wages of workers who get H-1B visas. If the bill becomes law, the minimum wage paid to H-1B workers would rise to at least $100,000 annually, and be adjusted it for inflation. Right now, the minimum is $60,000. The sponsors say that would go a long way toward fixing some of the abuses of the H-1B program, which critics say is currently used to simply replace American workers with cheaper, foreign workers. In 2013, the top nine companies acquiring H-1B visas were technology outsourcing firms, according to an analysis by a critic of the H-1B program. (The 10th is Microsoft.) The thinking goes that if minimum H-1B salaries are brought closer to what high-skilled tech employment really pays, the economic incentive to use it as a worker-replacement program will drop off. "We need to ensure we can retain the world's best and brightest talent," said Issa in a statement about the bill. "At the same time, we also need to make sure programs are not abused to allow companies to outsource and hire cheap foreign labor from abroad to replace American workers." The H-1B program offers 65,000 visas each fiscal year, with an additional 20,000 reserved for foreign workers who have advanced degrees from US colleges and universities. The visas are awarded by lottery each year. Last year, the government received more than 236,000 applications for those visas.

23 of 540 comments (clear)

  1. Well Trump has one thing right by ShooterNeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not a big fan of Trump, but if he actually delivers on this campaign promise (even if it's just scrawling his signature on the bill and then taking all the credit in speeches) that will be a good thing for me and most employed people on slashdot.

    Is there any way this is a bad thing? H1B was supposed to be for bringing in essential foreign talent. If a company isn't willing to pay $100k per year plus the various expenses, whoever they are bringing it must not have been all that talented.

    1. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is the loopholes though. This act won't improve shit if companies are still allowed to skim 95% of that 100k salary and fill H1-B seats with 5$/hour contractors instead.

    2. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by ShooterNeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the client pays $100k it's still a more viable option for them to consider hiring an American, except of course in California. This also fixes another loophole where nonprofits could bring in all the H1Bs they want with no cap - they still can, but needing to pay $100k, indexed for inflation, is a lot better than it is now.

      Making the bill even sweeter, actual wages in America are NOT increasing with inflation. So in 10 or 20 years, that 100k will effectively be even higher.

    3. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by knightghost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A completely free market leads to monopolies and continually lower standards of living for the majority of citizens.

      Completely free markets are just as bad as communism and socialism.

    4. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Bartles · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't there a huge expanse between what we have now and a completely free market?

    5. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by tsotha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This. If you can hire a local for $90k, you're not going to pay $100k to bring someone in from another country unless he has a skill you can't find locally. And by that I mean you actually can't find, not the wink-wink-cover-your-eyes can't find employers are doing today.

    6. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by mattwarden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is not that simple. It is much harder for an H1-B to change jobs. I'm not sure it's true that a large employer would always prefer a $90k US citizen over a $100k H1-B.

      This is one part of the H1-B program that I do agree needs to be reformed.

    7. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. Right now the US has a huge crony capitalism problem, that's been built upon by decades of democrats and republicans. And they're fighting tooth and fucking nail to stop Trump anyway they can from breaking their gravy train.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True. They are pretty much indentured servants. If they move to another company, the new company has to be willing to go through all the legal BS to continue their H1-B and potentially their green card paperwork. So there is a lot of incentive to not bounce around.

      The whole H1-B program is mostly a sham. Go to any Fortune X company and do a skill assessment of their foreign contractors. The number that turn out to be "exceptional talents" with hard to find degrees or special training/experience is actually rather small. The consulting companies barely go through the motions to hide that so the expectation of getting caught seems to be pretty low.

    9. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by zippthorne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes. Right now the US has a huge crony capitalism problem, that's been built upon by decades of democrats and republicans. And they're fighting tooth and fucking nail to stop Trump anyway they can from breaking their gravy train.

      The language you use to describe the problem is hurting your ability to solve the problem. You could as much call it crony socialism and be describing exactly the same thing, but the solutions that would get proposed would look somewhat different (and would invariably fail to eliminate the crony component, which is the actual loathsome bit.)

      We have a problem with politically connected entities being able to obtain special privileges for themselves at the public's expense.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re: Well Trump has one thing right by gumbi+west · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh, Carrier did move most of the jobs. Ford never was going to. While those were large numbers of jobs, you do realize that about 85,000 people lose their jobs each week day, right? So the 800 Carrier jobs would be 1% of a single day of job losses. this is why presidents typically don't track down jobs here and there, they need to setup the system and let the chips fall, correcting the larger system when they can--but the invisible hand does most of the doing.

    11. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Right now the US has a huge crony capitalism problem"

      Back in the tycoon days you had basically unfettered capitalism. Because of that, big tycoons were able to set their way even to buy government -and that's how you got today's "crony capitalism problem".

      Now: is there a way unfettered capitalism doesn't evolution into crony capitalism? I don't think so.

    12. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you fucking serious? This is the same Trump who just nominated the who's who of crony capitalism for his cabinet?

      Trump gives zero shits about cronyism or the "swamp" or any such thing. He said anything necessary to get elected, and has even admitted such repeatedly. In fact, saying he gives zero shits is inaccurate - he is all in favor of cronyism, he just found it expedient to say otherwise because his sheeple followers believed anything he said.

      "Funny how that term caught on, isn't it?" Trump mused during a rally this month in Des Moines, Iowa. "I tell everyone, I hated it. Somebody said 'drain the swamp' and I said, 'Oh, that is so hokey. That is so terrible.'"
      "I said, all right, I'll try it," Trump continued. "So like a month ago I said 'drain the swamp' and the place went crazy. And I said 'Whoa, what's this?' Then I said it again. And then I start saying it like I meant it, right? And then I started to love it, and the place loved it. Drain the swamp. It's true. It's true. Drain the swamp."

    13. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You say this, but with what proof? And inflation is not always a bad thing, especially if the average income and standard of living outpaces it.

      As a counter, Walmart raised their minimum wage this year, and saw significant revenue gains, because their employees now have more money to re-inject into the economy aka buy shit at Walmart!

      It's been long established that when you give lots of money to already rich people, they just stash it away. When you give money to poor people, they actually immediately go and spend it to but what they need. Trickle down economics is the biggest fucking joke, it just doesn't work.

    14. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't even need to make them citizens, just make it so they own their own visa. Then they can change jobs at will.

      We don't want them changing jobs at will. They are here to fill a specific need. Once they have done that, they should go home and employ their skills there. We have qualified citizens here who need jobs. Up until we institute a MGI, we're going to need to be protectionist about those jobs.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Well Trump has one thing right by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MY brother works for a successful company which I won't name. It is fortune 250. HE goes to India because he too can't find anyone qualified. THe salaries he uses from HR are from his local Department of Labor. No he DOES NOT CHEAP out. He can't find anyone willing to work at least 25% over the market average in his area. He has no choice

      If your brother has data that says the market average wage is X and he finds that he is unable to hire anyone for less than X+25%, doesn't that mean that your brother's data is incorrect, and that the actual market wage IS X+25%? Isn't the most accurate market pricing what you would actually have to pay into the market to obtain the goods or services you're looking for? Any "data" which suggests otherwise is out of date or inaccurate.

      What I see in this situation is businesses using data to insist on a wage ceiling, probably because they have a business model designed to function only below a specific and arbitrary wage ceiling. The larger problem is probably a total compensation number, including executive compensation, that can't grow to accommodate market wage demands without influencing product pricing in a way that hurts sales.

      I would suggest that the real problem is excessive executive compensation and that reducing executive compensation to pay actual market wages for necessary labor to keep total compensation in line with the product pricing is the best solution. Meeting market wage demands will in theory bring more labor into the market, increasing its supply and ultimately slowing or even reducing wage growth.

      I also think there are powerful class dynamics at work here as well, where certain labor positions are seen as inherently less worthy than others and regardless of actual market prices, firms want to impose compensation caps on certain types of labor because it disrupts the class dynamics. Some classes of workers are seen as inherently more valuable than others and should *always* be paid more than others. When the market prices suggest that these lower classed workers need to be paid more to attract and retain them, you have the higher classed workers attempting to cap wages for the lower classes, because the alternatives are paying the market wages and losing their class status.

      What's interesting is that nobody suggests that the paying the lower class of labor a higher wage than the higher class of worker doesn't have to mean that the higher class of worker (ie, managers) also loses their power and authority, only that they are paid less. Even average professional athletes make more money than most coaching staff, but this doesn't diminish the power of the coaching staff to control the players and regulate their labor activities.

  2. Good. by generic_screenname · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The goal of the H1B program is supposedly to bring talent to this country that simply cannot be had otherwise. Talent like that should be rare and paid accordingly.

  3. Still too low by Orgasmatron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $100,000 is still too low. I'd say $300,000, but I'm open to an auction system too. The auction method would need a quota, and the other could safely be open ended.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
    1. Re:Still too low by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, $100k is definitely still too low.

      $150k to $200k ideally.

      --
      You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
  4. Close The Masters Degree Loophole by RoscoeChicken · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My graduate program is chock full of unqualified "fresher" Indians looking to exploit the Masters degree loophole.

    Best and the brightest? Don't make me laugh.

  5. Re:Just can the entire guest worker series. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is all the big companies shit on the small and medium sized ones. Gee with the rampant corruption and unlimited campaign contributions just who do you think will get those lovely cheap workers?

    Also many are Doctors and Engineering professionals and not just helpdesk sweatshops.

    How the can smaller guy compete with the big houses then for projects at companies when they can offer the same service for 1/2 the price due to cheaper labor?

    The solution is to charge 25% above the average market value by county which keeps statistics for job titles. Let's say that Sr Unix admin is worth $125,000 a year in San Jose? The H1B1 visa holder can do the job but by law has to pay $156,260. A Sr. Unix Admin in rural Texas is worth $70,000 a year? Hire an H1B1 Visa for $87,500.

    The doctors can still come here with no limit. Since they are specialists mostly they already charge $250,000 a year so the extra cost won't prohibit hospitals from hiring these doctors which America desperately needs which I think most slashdotters agree is what the Visa program was originally for

  6. Re: Mod parent up by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These are solid middle class jobs that are not super specialized anymore.

    If they're not super specialized it shouldn't be an issue to find someone locally to do it for less than $100k. The H1B program was supposed to be for filling those really difficult to fill jobs.

    And if you truly can't find anyone to do it locally, then it should be worth $100k to you.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. Re: I just got done hiring two people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or your "corporate recruiter" screened out the Americans, folks over 40, etc......