Slashdot Mirror
H1-B Administrators Are Challenging An Unusually Large Number of Applications (bloomberg.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader decaffeinated quotes Bloomberg: Starting this summer, employers began noticing that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications. Cases that would have sailed through the approval process in earlier years ground to a halt under requests for new paperwork. The number of challenges -- officially known as "requests for evidence" or RFEs -- are up 44 percent compared to last year, according to statistics from USCIS...
"We're entering a new era," said Emily Neumann, an immigration lawyer in Houston who has been practicing for 12 years. "There's a lot more questioning, it's very burdensome." She said in past years she's counted on 90 percent of her petitions being approved by Oct. 1 in years past. This year, only 20 percent of the applications have been processed. Neumann predicts she'll still have many unresolved cases by the time next year's lottery happens in April 2018.
"We're entering a new era," said Emily Neumann, an immigration lawyer in Houston who has been practicing for 12 years. "There's a lot more questioning, it's very burdensome." She said in past years she's counted on 90 percent of her petitions being approved by Oct. 1 in years past. This year, only 20 percent of the applications have been processed. Neumann predicts she'll still have many unresolved cases by the time next year's lottery happens in April 2018.
As somebody who has been through the USICS process with a relative I don't think you really capture the situation at all.
An RFE isn't a "challenge." I received an RFE myself. It is what it says it is: a request for additional documentation. The person who decides to send an RFE or not isn't a person who has "reasons," or an "agenda." They are basically a police officer. Their title is Immigration Officer, and their job involves not only investigating the paperwork to see if it is naughty, but also chasing down and arresting people who don't have the right paperwork. This is not some sort of political appointee, these are the same career professionals who were doing the job last year, the year before, the year before. Whatever personal agenda they might have, it isn't changing from year to year.
What changed is a policy, relating to how much paperwork they have to find in the application before approving it. In the past they had instructions not to really investigate the H1B applications in the same way that they process other types of application; now they're applying the same type of evidence standards that other applications require, and are in fact called for in the laws authorizing the H1B program. That's what they're going to do. Naturally, these companies were submitting the least evidence they needed to get approved, because in a "rubber stamp" regulatory environment you don't want to submit extra stuff that might get examined. But as here, when they suddenly switch to the actual system that the law set up, now those applications don't have all the required evidence, and so of course they're going to get RFEs.
If their situation is like mine, and everything is in order the Officer just wanted additional evidence, then they'll have no problem. If in fact their application doesn't meet the standards in the law, and they only even submitted it because they anticipated getting rubber-stamped, then they'll get rejected. Rightfully.
Your idea is silly because it would require there to be a bunch of new appointees running things, but actually that isn't the case. They're not involved in considerations like trying to encourage companies to hire domestic talent; they're concerned with the paperwork involved in documenting the required steps in the law.
These aren't the immigration cops who arrest brown people for being near the border; these are the immigration cops who wake you up at 6am to make sure you're really married and sleeping in the same bed! They don't give a rats ass what color her skin is; most people whose applications they approve are going to have brown skin, because we're on planet Earth.
Just to be clear: This action is NOT reducing the number of H1-B visas issued. It is reducing the INPUTS to the lottery, not the OUTPUTS. So the same number of visas will be issued, just to different people.
"In US Colonial times, the most talented come voluntarily to the US to be exploited."
Actually, a lot of cheap labor during the colonial era was obtained in the form of indentured servitude. Commit a crime, get sentenced and shipped off to America. The people who arrived in this way weren't exactly volunteering to be exploited; it was just better than alternatives like prison or execution. Also, these people were not necessarily the most talented.
The problem is that there are many tax incentives to abuse the visa system.
There is another problem you failed to mention: continuing H-1B status is often used by employers to coerce the visa holders to work for lower-than-normal wages.
That is a big part of the reason the tech industry has for years been lobbying to expand the program.
A number of recent studies have shown that there simply is no shortage of tech-field college and university graduates in the U.S.
Your idea leads to tariff wars where other countries implement your ideas.
It didn't end well.
Five years after the passage of the tariff, American trading partners had raised their own tariffs by a significant degree. France raised its tariffs on automobiles from 45% to 100%, Spain raised tariffs on American goods by 40%, and Germany and Italy raised tariffs on wheat. This customs war is often cited as one of the main causes of the Great Depression.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
The problem with H1Bs, is they allow the company to have a leverage over their employees beyond just mere payment. Your employer can essentially deport you at will. Not just fire and cut off income, but literally cut off residency. This leads to a terrible power imbalance, that of course the employers would seek.
You're right, but also wrong.
Yes, H1-B gives a company more leverage over the employee as would be the case with regular U.S. Citizen/LPR employees. However, they are not entirely at the mercy of their employers since an H1-B petition can be ported to another company. Yes, they will have to file the petition and USCIS will need to approve it, but essentially an H1-B can move companies.
In practice, most H1-Bs do not, because they are waiting for their greencards. Let's be honest here: most H1-B visa recipients are from Indian origin. Regardless of how you feel about that, since India is an oversubscribed country in terms of immigration visas available, it takes many, many years for most Indians to get their greencards. Switching employers while having an approved I-140 (and waiting for a greencard to be available) is not so easy. That's why most Indian (and thus the vast majority of) H1-Bs stick with their employers, not because their employer can deport them at will.
In the case of the L1 visa, the story is true. An L1 cannot be ported to another company, and thus termination of employment means termination of residency.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.