Slashdot Mirror
Trump Administration Tightens Scrutiny of Skilled Worker Visa Applicants (inc.com)
wyattstorch516 writes: The Trump administration is tightening the scrutiny on the H-1B visa program (Warning: paywalled; alternative source). Changes would undo actions by the Obama administration. There are two big regulatory changes looming that would undo actions by the Obama administration. "The first change allowed spouses of H-1B workers the right to work. That regulation is being challenged in court and the Trump administration is expected to eliminate the provision rather than defend it," reports WSJ. "The second change affects the Optional Practical Training program, which allows foreign graduates from U.S. colleges in science and technology an extra two years of work authorization, giving them time to win an H-1B visa. The Trump administration could kill that benefit or reduce the two-year window, according to people familiar with the discussions." The Journal highlights a "series of more modest changes that have added scrutiny to visa processing":
- "USCIS directed last month that adjudicators no longer pay 'deference' to past determinations for renewal applications. This means an applicant's past approval won't carry any weight if he or she applies for a renewal.
- The agency is conducting more applicant interviews, which critics say slows the system. The agency spokesman says this process will ramp up over several years and is needed to detect fraud and make accurate decisions.
- In the spring, the agency suspended premium processing, which allowed for fast-track consideration to those who paid an extra fee. This option wasn't resumed until October, meaning many workers who qualified for a coveted H-1B visa had to wait months for a decision.
- State Department officials have been told to consider that Mr. Trump's 'Buy American, Hire American' executive order directs visa programs must 'protect the interests of United States workers.' And the Foreign Affairs Manual now instructs officers to scrutinize applications of students to ensure they plan to return to their home countries. A State Department official said the official rules haven't changed but said a 'comprehensive' review is under way."
- "USCIS directed last month that adjudicators no longer pay 'deference' to past determinations for renewal applications. This means an applicant's past approval won't carry any weight if he or she applies for a renewal.
- The agency is conducting more applicant interviews, which critics say slows the system. The agency spokesman says this process will ramp up over several years and is needed to detect fraud and make accurate decisions.
- In the spring, the agency suspended premium processing, which allowed for fast-track consideration to those who paid an extra fee. This option wasn't resumed until October, meaning many workers who qualified for a coveted H-1B visa had to wait months for a decision.
- State Department officials have been told to consider that Mr. Trump's 'Buy American, Hire American' executive order directs visa programs must 'protect the interests of United States workers.' And the Foreign Affairs Manual now instructs officers to scrutinize applications of students to ensure they plan to return to their home countries. A State Department official said the official rules haven't changed but said a 'comprehensive' review is under way."
First off, it's "President Trump" and execution of his platform is pretty much what the voters expect, isn't it? Or have we come to expect less of our voted officials?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
There's no practical way to actually force them to hire qualified US applicants. They can just make up ridiculous requirements and then wave them for the cheapest H1B that comes along. This is how it's already working. All this action could possibly do is drive up the cost of H1B workers. Most likely it won't even do that. It'll just consolidate the hiring process to some agency the Trump family profits from directly. It won't actually create more real jobs for citizens, or break the salary stagnation problem.
also need rules so they can't post jobs that no USC can fill and an min pay start at 80K + COL boosts. Maybe even a few check applicants that they must explain why they did not get called / did not get an interview.
Now the POTUS needs to get the SCROTUSES that sit on the SCOTUS and interpret the COTUS for the POTUS to re-interpret the COTUS to protect American Jobs.
Doing so will require the support of all the ROTUSES and SOTUSES of both HOTUSES and of course the GOTUSES of the SOTUS.
If the POTUS can't do that, than why don't we just elect a cat to sit in as the POTUS.
Just in time!
Twinstiq, game news
Trump's Mar-A-Lago gets approval to hire 70 foreign workers
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/trumps-mar-lago-approval-hire-70-foreign-workers-51041012
I'm a US citizen who just took a job in Japan and the system here is that once you get your visa, you can work anyone you want to work for the duration of the visa (1 year). After that time is up, your current employer has to sponsor you. It changes the dynamic because the employer knows they can't hold onto you so they they a) only invest in someone they really want and b) do what they can to make sure you are _happy_ working for them because they don't want to have to go through the whole process again. I'm not saying the system is perfect but if the company lied to me or treats me like crap I'm perfectly free to find another job (and people do).
The current US system is going to be abused as long as it let's employers enslave employees. Ethics aside, as an employer you'd have to be stupid to ignore a relatively cheap pool of labor that legally bound to you for the years it takes most people to get a green card.
That'll be WAIVE for the semi-literate amongst us.
Large-ish tech company (ASIC design), headquarters in SV, but we're a satellite office elsewhere. Of maybe 40 people, I'd wager at least a third are H1B, and probably a quarter are on OTP. And we're growing and still hiring.
We've posted and solicited all over, websites LinkedIn, colleges, etc. We just can't get very many American applications. No idea why, but we hire from the pool of applicants, so we have lots of talented H1Bs. If this goes through, our applicant pool is going to get even smaller.
It really is a fitting symbol of the insane level of polarization in US politics that an article simply reporting on what the administration is doing is labeled 'anti-Trump clickbait'. Hint: If reporting on the actions of your president counts as 'anti-Trump', that should tell you a lot about the level of competence of Trump and his suitability to rule.
But nah, better just to shut your ears and yell about boycotts and witch hunts, right? Reminds me of Gollum from the Lord of The Rings. 'Filthy mediases, reporting on what is happening. We hates it, we hates it, precious!"
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
Even though the U.S. citizens did not elect him
President Trump is our constitutionally elected president. If you don't like the process spelled out in our Constitution, feel free to start the amendment process.
Failing that, feel free to leave.
I love hearing about how businesses "can't find talent".
Here's a question for you. How many internships and apprenticeships has your company sponsored? I'm not talking about running-for-coffee internships. I'm talking about partnering with a local or regional engineering college, taking a few prospective grads and training them to do ASIC design.
Too many companies whine about a talent shortage, and then want the government to solve that problem for them.
Boo hoo - no sympathy from me.
Immigration law is just that - law. Enforcing the law is the job of the executive branch. I see nothing wrong with enforcing the laws on the books. If you don't like the law - work with your congresscritter to change the law.
For businesses claiming a "shortage of talent" - I want to ask one question: How many internships and apprenticeships have you sponsored? I'm not talking about running-for-coffee internships. I'm talking about partnering with one or two local engineering colleges, taking a couple of prospective grads and training them to do the highly skilled work that you want done.
Too many businesses complain about a talent shortage, do nothing to solve the problem, and then ask for Government to solve the problem for them.
You may like (or not like) German immigration policy - but you can not also ignore the fact that Germany integrates training for their skilled workforce into the education of that workforce - and the on-the-job training is done by the industries that need the talent.
If you aren't doing anything to try and fix the problem, you have no right to complain about it.
What will become of the Simpsons?
Don't worry, Apu is a citizen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
There are two optional practical trainings possible for students admitted to accredited US universities. Curricular Practical Training that happens before graduation. and Optional Practical Training, that happens after graduation. Both are limited to 12 months. In addition for STEM graduates, there is an additional 15 month extension to the OPT, allowing them 27 months of work permit, and if you include CPT, an F1 student can work for 39 months in USA.
This news item seems to suggest the 15 month additional time give to STEM graduates is going to be taken away.
I have seen the abuse of CPT and OPT. Mostly in non science fields. People enroll in a 12 month "executive MBA" programs in cheap less popular state schools, (heard of Indiana University of Pennsylvania, or University of California at Washington PA? these legit PA state schools with low fee), and game the system to work get 24 months and sometimes wangle another 15 month by showing their STEM undergrad degree from some diploma mill in India.
On the other hand, people coming to USA, be eligible to enroll in legitimate accredited US univ, with a genuine STEM program and get the degree and get to work in USA are the good kind of immigrants/workers we Americans should seek to encourage.
What we need to really fight is the way the body shopping Indian companies like TCS or Wipro or Infosys or their American counter parts Accenture, Syntel, iGate who game the system by claiming degrees from Indian Diploma mills to be equivalent to American Accredited university degrees. This is the abuse we should fight. Any Indian, Chinese, or any one, who struggles through GRE the way my kids do, and do a genuine Masters should be welcomed.
But the body shopping companies have the money to spend of lawyers to game the system, and the unorganized students from foreign countries can't match them.
Think about what we are doing here, we recruit smart people from all over the world, give them an American standard education, insight into American way of doing things, and then send them back. At the same time, we allow low quality graduates from Indian diploma mills to flood our system depressing the wages of Americans.
Can we be more insane than this? The incredible stupidity of our system astounds me.
I am from India, now I am an American and as American I want the next generation of me from India. Not the TCS dummies.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Now if we could only get the hiring managers to realize this. 2 cheap H1bs, that together, provide half the productivity (which is roughly my experience with them. . .) of an American worker for the same outlay, is NOT a smart business deal. . .
Americans sometimes wonder why real wages have stayed stagnant since the 1960s. The simple answer is supply and demand: in response to the toxic effect of unions, businesses have been lobbying for us to dump more people into the workforce. This increases supply and thus reduces wages, which allows business to counter-act unions. We have been flooding the workforce since the 1960s with women, Hart-Cellar Act third world labor, illegal immigrants, H1Bs, and now digital helpers like computers and (soon) robots. Each one of these dumps cuts wages. What Trump is doing is pure business logic: he is reducing supply, increasing demand, and therefore, raising wages.
Alternative Right.
He’s targeting students, not companies like wipro.
Easy enough to fix - don't allow them to hire any H1B that doesn't meet all their stated requirements. If they want to lower the requirements, they must first prove they couldn't find an American that meets those lowered requirements either.
The H1B system is being horribly abused, but simply enforcing the existing rules would eliminate most of the problems. Requiring a public job listing on a single nationwide job board would be a relatively easy way to make sure the companies are actually looking for local talent before resorting to imported labor ("We see 653 Americans applied for this position through the board. Please prove that none of them met your requirements...")
An alternate method I've heard proposed is to require that H1B's be paid at least X% more than the median salary for comparable positions - after all, they're supposed to have such impressive skills that the local job pool can't satisfy the demand.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
"Trump Administration Tightens Scrutiny of Skilled Worker Visa Applicants "
Past tense. Deed is done.
"There are two big regulatory changes looming that would undo actions by the Obama administration...that (existing) regulation is being challenged in court "
Future tense. Not yet done. Subject to change or revision.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I'd contend a lot of the success of the United States in the last 40 years has been due to acquiring all those smart folks from the other parts of the world and getting them to come here. They get settled, found American companies, hire people, and pay some level of taxes.
Now it sounds like we're going to educate them (though they might just go elsewhere) and force them out so other countries likely will offer them perks to come and do the same. Then in 10-20 years, we're going to be asking why aren't we the leaders in various industries.
There's no practical way to actually force them to hire qualified US applicants
As much as I dislike Trump, his administration can most definitely prevent companies from importing cheap pseudo-skilled H1B companies by essentially playing the same game, i.e having immigration authorities putting similarly unattainable requirements on H1B applicants. One pretty effective way that would almost end the whole business in it's current form is to just flat out discredit any and all indian schools and training facilities altogether. The still ongoing travel ongoing ban debacle clearly shows that Trump doesn't care at all about blanket banning whole countries from the U.S.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
Canadian here.
What I don't understand about America's immigration policy is this: If America needs a particular class of person (carpenter / developer / nurse / whatever) why doesn't America just let them immigrate to the USA? Apply for a green card, get a green card, arrive, then be on a path to citizen as an "American."
Why all this "H1B" business and "Green Card Lotteries" and all the other nonsense?
I admit I'm cynical, but on paper this is a good move. I'm sure the companies who actually use the H-1B for cheap labor have some nice exceptions carved out, but signalling that the floodgates are closing might force companies to get creative about how they find and train people.
I work for a multinational company and have worked with several on-staff H-1B workers who are quite good. The company uses The contractors that come in from the body shops (TCS, IBM, Accenture, Infosys, etc.) are quite obviously brought in to reduce costs. I think the program itself is OK, in that the letter of the law lets companies have a small safety valve to hire highly skilled people in certain industries. What I don't like, having worked in IT for 20+ years, is that there's less opportunity for newbies to get entry-level work and the work performed by the H-1Bs is no better than what you'd get from a domestic newbie. If we scare all potential new hires away from IT or computer science, we're going to have a newbie pipeline problem. Even 18-year-old students make rational choices about their futures, and we see a lot of very smart people spending their talent working for investment banks or getting their MBA and becoming management consultants.
If we can show people there's still a career path to be had in IT and development, then people will continue to pursue it. If the body shops take all the H-1B visas and use them to staff up help desks or do grunt work development, then people will see there's no future and act accordingly.
I really wish these morons would understand that the US needs to compete in technology. And when you get to the bleeding edge of technology, the people who truly understand and are working to develop the "new things" are usually just a handful. And that handful of people rarely lives in the US. In my career, there are about 70 people around the world who work on the same technology, and the vast majority aren't American. We already have to get tons of H1B visas to compete. There simply aren't people in the states with the skillset, knowlege, and desire to work in the area.
The headline makes it sound like this is a done deal, but even the summary doesn't even say they're actively pushing it, they're just 'expected' to do these things.
Talk to me when the actual number of H1-B visas handed out is reduced or when either of the two changes mentioned take affect. Until then this is all just theater. It plays well with his voters but he never actually does any of it. Anyone else remember during the election when he said he hires workers on visas for his golf courses because he couldn't find workers and there were interviews with people who applied and were turned down?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
we can't fight that because it's too complex. We'll get bogged down in details and lose, just like we're doing now. End the program entirely. Admit PHD candidates and above only and have them reviewed by other PHD candidates. Then properly fund our schools with a 'College for All' program so that if American businesses want an educated workforce they have to pay for it instead of importing it. Anything else is a losing proposition for American workers.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Could it be your not getting many applications because you've set your standards too high? And could it be you're able to do that thanks to the H1-b program? Having a pool of 1.3 billion desperate people is a great way to reduce labor costs...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Then the co. will shape the "requirements" to fit the applicant. The auditor may ask, "You listed Java, but your org doesn't use Java." The co. can then say, "well, we plan to." It's hard to audit people's heads to see what they plan. There's a lot of tricks one can pull, and head-hunters perfect them over time.
Yes, I agree they should focus more on the rejected citizens: are there any that are pretty close to fitting current needs. If the co. asks for 5 years of MS-MVC but the rejected citizen only has 3, that should be considered a good-enough fit: learn on the job. You cannot get experience without getting experience.
Further, limit the rejection reason to say the top 2 or 3 skills. Otherwise, the head-headers will load it up with a long list of "required" skills as a way to reject citizens. There's no practical way a gov't auditor could even test the visa applicant on a long list of skills to verify.
Table-ized A.I.
Cheap labor or not, H1B visa holders are residing in the country, paying taxes, buying homes and spending their money here. They are adding a lot to the US economy. The amount of work that will get outsourced to foreign countries will cause a dent in the US economy and the reverse brain drain of highly qualified individuals out of here.
The federal government should do two things:
1) Add $50K per year, per worker, to the employer's cost of hiring an H-1B. That money would go into a national "Train America" fund.
2) Use the "Train America" fund money for two reasons:
a) Train American citizens in skills that are in short supply in the US, and
b) Pay the salaries of these trained people for the first year of their employment (internship, apprenticeship, entry-level employee, whatever).
The extra $50K charge of per year, per worker would discourage employers from hiring H-1Bs. And the training and subsidized salaries from the Train America funds would help build a pool of Americans who had training and experience in skills that are in short supply in the US.
Somebody works at Tata...
set the minimum wage for an H1-B to 300% of the prevailing wage in the industry. Then levy a 300% tax on their wages. If they're that critical to your business you'll pay it, since you won't have a business without them. Take that 300% and give it to the Americans put out of work by the import of cheap labor.
You've got to watch it so subsidies don't creep in to keep the effective costs down (like they do with Tobacco, where we tax cigarettes then subsidize tobacco growth). But it's a start.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You're _lucky_ if they do positive work.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Nothing changed. I support laws that excercise the constitutional authority granted to government.
Notice how some of those posts you referenced refer to powers that the Federal government has assumed - yet are not enumerated in the constitution.
1st post: Government providing services it has no authority to provide. I am opposed to unconstitutional laws empowering congress to provide services it has no authority to provide.
2nd post: Making your own guns - perfectly legal and I cited an ATF regulation source confirming as much. Here the ATF is actually protecting a constitutionally protected right. I support these laws/regulations since they are constitutional. I am opposed to any laws that violate the protections afforded by the 2nd amendment.
3rd post: Zoning - this one I'll give you. Zoning and planning is the right of local governments. We didn't agree with the ruling, but we also didn't bitch about it to the rest of the world. We took our lumps and moved to another space. We didn't oppose the ruling after the decision was made since it was a constitutional use of authority.
Immigration is clearly within the constitutional authority of the Federal Government:
"The Congress shall have Power To...establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 4
In The Immigration and Naturalization Act congress gave broad authority to the president to regulate immigration:
"(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
So I'm not sure what you are arguing. My posts clearly show I support the enforcement of constitutional law. President Trump's enforcement of immigration law is clearly constitutional and clearly within the scope and authority of his office.
The media is well aware that they can generate revenue by simply putting Trump in the headline of any article because the tribes will come out on both sides to sling curses at each other. It's a sad state of affairs that we're more interested in calling each other idiots instead of focusing on what's in the best interest of our nation. The press doesn't help, and in fact hinders us in that aspect.
Just another day in Paradise
I'm with you on wanting to fix it, but want to point out that when a company wants to hire someone, it's a simple matter of writing the requisition to the specific set of skills that that person has. Compliance requirements force us to interview other people, but we can also choose who we interview.
Just another day in Paradise
Easy enough to fix - don't allow them to hire any H1B that doesn't meet all their stated requirements. If they want to lower the requirements, they must first prove they couldn't find an American that meets those lowered requirements either.
The H1B system is being horribly abused, but simply enforcing the existing rules would eliminate most of the problems. Requiring a public job listing on a single nationwide job board would be a relatively easy way to make sure the companies are actually looking for local talent before resorting to imported labor ("We see 653 Americans applied for this position through the board. Please prove that none of them met your requirements...")
An alternate method I've heard proposed is to require that H1B's be paid at least X% more than the median salary for comparable positions - after all, they're supposed to have such impressive skills that the local job pool can't satisfy the demand.
First thing... a nationalised job board... Isn't that... Communism?
Seriously though, they'll just do what they did in Australia. Advertise a highly skilled job for minimum wage and claim "We cant get an Australian to do the job, give us our 457 (Australia's H1-B)". Under the 457 Visa rules, a company needs to demonstrate that they cannot find an Australian to do the job, after the crackdown on skills loading (advertising a job with impossible to have skills) they just advertised jobs at salary levels vastly lower than Australians at that skill level would accept.
For the record, I think a national (govt funded) job board would be a fantastic idea but I'm not an American.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
My point is that you've already decided that there is a group that only likes enforcement of laws they agree with and that they are the problem. And you posted a rant about it without even bothering to ask yourself if you're any different. Other than not deriving a definition of "just laws" based on your same interpretation of the constitution, what's the difference between "liberals" as you have defined them and yourself?
Somehow I don't think requiring companies to list jobs on a single recognized location to be eligible for special government consideration is *quite* the same thing as communism... but then I also think unrestrained capitalism is every bit as dangerous as communism, so what do I know.
I also think there should be no price cap for such a thing - H1Bs are supposed to be used to import skills which aren't available locally, NOT which aren't available cheaply enough. Which is why I've got to say that personally I prefer a salary floor approach, probably something like the offered salary must be in the top 20% of jobs with a comparable skill set to be eligible.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
The difference is adherence to the constitution.
I can't really make it any clearer than that.
Mission accomplished. The main abuse of the H-1B program is to get cheap labor into the country and drive down salaries. If it's expensive, that doesn't work. The originally stated purpose of the H-1B program is to bring in people from outside the country to do valuable things that US citizens and legal residents can't do, and those people are worth extra expense.
Look, this is the one thing Trump's done that I actually like. Let me have at least one positive thought about the man.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Even when you adjust for inflation, the trend has been that each election is more expensive than the last. A lot of this probably has to do with the ever-growing length of the campaigns, which now start well over a year before the actual election date.