I had this same discussion with my doctor. I asked him why physicians go along with their patients requests for advertised medicines. He said that when patients ask for particular medicines, doctors are loathe to refuse the patients requests for those advertised medicines because doctors would lose patients (the patients would shop for another doctor who would prescribe the medicine). So, again, it's all about the money (as usual).
By any sensible notion, the drug ads should be banned. However, some time ago, our fearless leaders in the U.S.A. made it legal to advertise almost any medicine (whether or not the medicine has the health properties that are advertised). The drug companies lobbists are very influencial - not to mention the media folks - and both would would lose money if those advertisements for drugs were not allowed.
I don't care who telecommutes, as long as my personal data is never stored or accessed by the telecommuter. If I find that my personal data has been compromised by someone who wants to work at home, but is responsible (either directly or indirectly) for the loss of my data, I will sue the company that hired that person, that person's management, and that person. I believe that I would have a very good case of negligence. I'm not sure why the courts aren't filled with such cases now.
There is never a need to put my personal data on a PC in someone's home (other than mine). Why is this permitted by any responsible management?
Re:Cheaper yes, but less skilled?
on
The H-1B Swindle
·
· Score: 1
"Protectionism will not work"
Protectionism is always necessary to protect a country's worker citizens. This is an extreme example, but what if the US borders were opened to all countries, for all jobs (all jobs, not just some). The standard of living in the USA would deteriorate for all citizens except those who had inherited or built a considerable amount of wealth, and could live off that accumulated wealth. There would always be some country that had a lower pay level than other countries.
H1B workers are not coming here because the working conditions and pay in their native countries are better/higher than in the USA for equivalent jobs.
Somehow, folks have the misguided impression that our borders should be opened completely to workers (except for workers who do their jobs). They also seem to have the impression that no one would fill high-tech jobs if H1B workers were not available. Hogwash! The jobs were filled before H1B was implemented, and would be again (albeit at higher wages) if H1B were eliminated.
Some folks in this discussion are equating overseas workers with H1B workers. If my job goes overseas, so be it. However, don't bring in someone to undercut my salary, then claim that they are being imported to fill a position that has no USA workers available.
Employers get around the prevailing wage rules by redefining the job title or description sleightly so that there are no workers already doing the redefined job. Then they can pay almost anything they want for the redefined job, and it becomes the prevailing wage for that redefined job.
I don't think any employers have ever been prosecuted for hiring workers that do not work at the "prevailing wage".
Re:No need for H1-B Workers in high tech industry
on
The H-1B Swindle
·
· Score: 1
"Utter nonsense. The number of home-grown workers for really HIGH tech industries is not just low, it's ZERO. Today's US education system does not produce anything worth considering seriously in this field."
When you use the term "Utter nonsense", you are discounting all the folks in the REALLY HIGH TECH industries that have been fired because those positions have been filled by H1B workers that the company's have brought in for lower wages.
Funny how the US education system you are discounting produced the folks that were overwhelmingly responsible for creating and building the IT industry in the first place.
My! What a grasp of the obvious! The results of this study rank right up there with ones such as "The crime rate is higher in areas with low income", or "Wealthy folks have better health care than poor folks".
As been iterated many times in these replies, any IT worker in the USA knows that H1B workers were hired to cut payroll expenses (not fill positions that were lacking in personnel). When the H1B workers were first allowed, it was supposedly under the condition that they would make the prevailing wage for the position they were filling. If that were the case, why were existing IT workers training H1B workers, who then replaced their trainers (who were consequently let go).
How many companies were prosecuted for violating the original rules about H1B replacements? I don't think any were!
The H1B program was (and is) a shame perpetrated by our legislators at the urging of business management. It did nothing for the US workers in the IT industry.
I've seen articles in regards to US students about "Why Johnny can't program". The real answer is, "Why should he?". To train an H1B worker to replace him?
When the management and executive positions are also taken over by H1B folks (it would save a lot more money than replacing the workers), then perhaps those folks will also get it.
When I am calling about problem covered by a warranty/guarantee, I want service as good as the Zippo Lighter guarantee. If it's broke, Zippo fixes your Zippo lighter for free. I've used the Zippo service. It's the very best in the entire world!
I understand that the first line of tech service is the person who (usually) has little knowledge of the item I'm calling about. They go through the flow chart with you and try to get rid of you as quickly as possible (because that's usually how they are being rated).
However, when my problem persists, I expect to be transferred to a 2nd level technical support person. I want someone intimately familiar with the product I'm calling about. I seldom get such technical support until after I've called several times.
If my problem still persists, I expect to be either transferred to or scheduled to talk to a 3rd level support person. I almost never get to talk to these folks.
At home/work service contracts (which are not inexpensive to purchase) are a joke. Usually you have to talk to many many tech support folks before they agree to send someone to your home.
When I get lousy tech support, I don't go back to buy more of whatever broke.
As a retired programmer (IBM), I can attest that companies do not hire H-1B personnel because they cannot find qualified personnel to fill the positions.
I watched folks training their replacements (H-1B and the like), then when the replacements were trained, the original personnel were released from their jobs (canned).
If H-1B folks are supposed to make the prevailing wage, why would a company hire one, two, or three of them to replace an existing employee?
The plain truth is that the H-1B employees (or their contract agencies) are being paid a far lower rate (violating the H-1B rules, I might add) than the folks they are replacing.
I haven't seen any companies prosecuted for these infractions... Hmmmmmmmm.
to replace
Slashdot Mirror
By any sensible notion, the drug ads should be banned. However, some time ago, our fearless leaders in the U.S.A. made it legal to advertise almost any medicine (whether or not the medicine has the health properties that are advertised). The drug companies lobbists are very influencial - not to mention the media folks - and both would would lose money if those advertisements for drugs were not allowed.
So the right thing to do will not happen (again).
I don't care who telecommutes, as long as my personal data is never stored or accessed by the telecommuter. If I find that my personal data has been compromised by someone who wants to work at home, but is responsible (either directly or indirectly) for the loss of my data, I will sue the company that hired that person, that person's management, and that person. I believe that I would have a very good case of negligence. I'm not sure why the courts aren't filled with such cases now.
There is never a need to put my personal data on a PC in someone's home (other than mine). Why is this permitted by any responsible management?
Protectionism is always necessary to protect a country's worker citizens. This is an extreme example, but what if the US borders were opened to all countries, for all jobs (all jobs, not just some). The standard of living in the USA would deteriorate for all citizens except those who had inherited or built a considerable amount of wealth, and could live off that accumulated wealth. There would always be some country that had a lower pay level than other countries.
H1B workers are not coming here because the working conditions and pay in their native countries are better/higher than in the USA for equivalent jobs.
Somehow, folks have the misguided impression that our borders should be opened completely to workers (except for workers who do their jobs). They also seem to have the impression that no one would fill high-tech jobs if H1B workers were not available. Hogwash! The jobs were filled before H1B was implemented, and would be again (albeit at higher wages) if H1B were eliminated.
Some folks in this discussion are equating overseas workers with H1B workers. If my job goes overseas, so be it. However, don't bring in someone to undercut my salary, then claim that they are being imported to fill a position that has no USA workers available.
I don't think any employers have ever been prosecuted for hiring workers that do not work at the "prevailing wage".
When you use the term "Utter nonsense", you are discounting all the folks in the REALLY HIGH TECH industries that have been fired because those positions have been filled by H1B workers that the company's have brought in for lower wages.
Funny how the US education system you are discounting produced the folks that were overwhelmingly responsible for creating and building the IT industry in the first place.
As been iterated many times in these replies, any IT worker in the USA knows that H1B workers were hired to cut payroll expenses (not fill positions that were lacking in personnel). When the H1B workers were first allowed, it was supposedly under the condition that they would make the prevailing wage for the position they were filling. If that were the case, why were existing IT workers training H1B workers, who then replaced their trainers (who were consequently let go).
How many companies were prosecuted for violating the original rules about H1B replacements? I don't think any were!
The H1B program was (and is) a shame perpetrated by our legislators at the urging of business management. It did nothing for the US workers in the IT industry.
I've seen articles in regards to US students about "Why Johnny can't program". The real answer is, "Why should he?". To train an H1B worker to replace him?
When the management and executive positions are also taken over by H1B folks (it would save a lot more money than replacing the workers), then perhaps those folks will also get it.
I understand that the first line of tech service is the person who (usually) has little knowledge of the item I'm calling about. They go through the flow chart with you and try to get rid of you as quickly as possible (because that's usually how they are being rated).
However, when my problem persists, I expect to be transferred to a 2nd level technical support person. I want someone intimately familiar with the product I'm calling about. I seldom get such technical support until after I've called several times.
If my problem still persists, I expect to be either transferred to or scheduled to talk to a 3rd level support person. I almost never get to talk to these folks.
At home/work service contracts (which are not inexpensive to purchase) are a joke. Usually you have to talk to many many tech support folks before they agree to send someone to your home.
When I get lousy tech support, I don't go back to buy more of whatever broke.
As a retired programmer (IBM), I can attest that companies do not hire H-1B personnel because they cannot find qualified personnel to fill the positions. I watched folks training their replacements (H-1B and the like), then when the replacements were trained, the original personnel were released from their jobs (canned). If H-1B folks are supposed to make the prevailing wage, why would a company hire one, two, or three of them to replace an existing employee? The plain truth is that the H-1B employees (or their contract agencies) are being paid a far lower rate (violating the H-1B rules, I might add) than the folks they are replacing. I haven't seen any companies prosecuted for these infractions... Hmmmmmmmm. to replace