Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FWD.us Wants More H-1B Visas, But 50% Go To Offshore Firms

Soulskill posted about 6 months ago | from the sources-say-50%-is-nearly-half dept.

Businesses 325

theodp writes: "On the day the U.S. began accepting H-1B visa applications for FY2015, Mark Zuckerberg's FWD.us PAC stepped up its lobbying efforts for more tech visas even as ComputerWorld reported that the major share of H-1B visas go to offshore outsourcing firms that use visa holders to displace U.S. workers. 'The two largest H-1B users,' notes ComputerWorld, 'are Indian-based, Infosys, with 6,298 visas, and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), with 6,258.' ComputerWorld adds that food and agricultural company Cargill is outsourcing IT jobs to TCS, including 300 in Minnesota, the home of Sen. Amy Klobuchar, sponsor of the I-Squared Act of 2013, which would allow H-1B visa caps to rise to 300,000 annually."

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Because (4, Insightful)

MrKaos (858439) | about 6 months ago | (#46637441)

Management still doesn't understand why you pay for talent.

Re:Because (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637527)

Except when it applies to executive remuneration.

Re:Because (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 6 months ago | (#46637671)

Wrong. When it applies to executive remuneration they REALLY don't understand why you pay for talent.

Otherwise, the problem would eventually solve itself.

Re:Because (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 6 months ago | (#46637953)

A good amount of management salary is based on performence/ percentage of profits and stock options. This is what drives long term incompetance and low salaries because the more profit, the more the bonuses as well as higher stock value.

There really isn't a good way to apply this to all employees ecept in mabufacturing were a piece count can be had. That introduces its own issues.

So no, talent in management will only perpetuate the problem not solve itself.

Bullshit (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638429)

A good amount of management salary is based on performence/ percentage of profits and stock options

That has been blatently untrue for years as boards practice "repricing" and back-dating of these ostensible stock options http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2007/1007/perspectives/p6.htm [nysscpa.org]

Those practices of making stock options into can't-lose forms of compensation haved moved them squarely out of the category of "pay for performance".

Most "executives" are morons (2, Insightful)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 6 months ago | (#46638027)

I am an American, but I was not born inside America. I am a naturalized American - so I think I might have something to add to this H1-B debate.

First of all, the entire H1-B scheme is ludicrous but it was a necessity, because the immigration system for America is totally fucked up.

What America needs (and what the world needs) are talents, *REAL* talents, but the American immigration laws have been fucked up, thanks to the liberals.

Now, as I have already mentioned, I am a *NATURALIZED* American citizen - which means, I also went through the official immigration channel to obtain my American citizenship. The only difference is that I got it some 30-odd years ago.

At that time, migrating to America wasn't easy - especially for non-Whites. One can say that it was "biased against the non-Whites" (if you prefer to look it that way) but what I see (and I have been through this) is that the process in that time, yes, *VERY TOUGH* for Asians, but that had a very strange side effect --- *MOST OF THE ASIANS ACCEPTED AS CITIZENS BACK IN THOSE TIMES WERE REAL TALENTS*.

And after those Asians (me included) got their citizenships, they re-invest in the American society, starting businesses or invent new stuffs - and in the process, most of the Asians who obtained citizenship created *MORE JOBS FOR THE AMERICANS* after they have become citizens.

But as I said - the immigration system has been TOTALLY FUCKED UP - and it is so bad now that if one Tom, Dick, or Harry gets his citizenship he can legally *IMPORT* an entire *CLAN* into America.

Now I am not going to talk about other races who got into America - I am a Chinese, and I will only talk about Chinese.

Last time, most Chinese I know lived in Chinatown. Most of them worked very very hard, earned enough money and they put their second / third generations through college.

Today, most of the Chinese from back then, who still stay in America are professionals. They are bankers, doctors, engineers, lawyers, business persons, and so on.

Those Chinese are in contrast with the *NEW CROP* of Chinese who are coming into America.

Most of the new crop of Chinese who are going to America are *REJECTS* from China - in a way, I was a "reject from China" too, back then, but I digress - what I am saying is this --- these Chinese coming into America are not the typical hard working type, not those who can use their body as well as they use their mind.

I have seen with my own eyes how some of the new crops of Chinese immigrants into America are doing - they are abusing the welfare system.

Last time when I first came to America, the Chinese, even the very poor ones, refused to apply for any welfare aid, because to them, "welfare" means "beggars", and those Chinese preferred to work their ass off, day after day, struggling through lives with meager wages, and *STILL* refuse to apply for any kind of welfare aid.

The new crops of the Chinese immigrants to America ? Huh !

As soon as they are eligible for *any* kind of welfare aid, they make sure they get it, because, to them, if everybody is abusing the system, and if they don't, that would be *STUPID*.

No more dignity, everything comes down to "what I can get from the system", not "what I can contribute to the system".

Do *NOT* get me wrong, though.

As bad as the *NEW CROP OF CHINESE IMMIGRANTS INTO AMERICA*, they are still rated *AMONG THE MOST EFFECTIVE IMMIGRANTS*.

Which means, no matter how much these new crops of Chinese immigrants abusing the welfare system, they still end up contributing to the system *FAR MORE* than what they got from it.

As for other groups of immigrants, I have seen worse !

I have seen Muslims who came from Morocco or Egypt or Turkey or India or one of those "stan" countries have as many as 10 children.

Yes, TEN FUCKING CHILDREN !

And they have no work.

They do not need to.

The American welfare system *PAYS THEM WELL*. With their 10 children, they got all the money they get, plus, they get "sponsorship", as in "funding", from some "middle eastern countries" (yes, there are many secret channels of money flowing through the Muslim communities inside America that you guys do not even realize).

The more "zeal" towards their religion (which means, the more RADICAL they are, in term of Islam), the more funds they got from those middle eastern countries.

And .. their 10 children ? Of course, like father like son (or like mother like daughter), will eventually grow up as religious nuts.

In other words, America is feedomg future generations of ISLAMIC TERRORISTS inside America, and their number is multiplying.

Enough of that ... back to H1-B.

That H1-B was a necessity because the immigration system has been SO FUCKED UP that most who come in today are *NOT* talented.

So, America needs to find a way to attract the talents.

Instead of scrapping all the insane immigration laws, they came up with "H1-B", as a stop-gap measure.

Is it working ? Somewhat.

But, as TFA has pointed out, the H1-B program itself is being abused, but none other than FOREIGN CORPORATIONS !!

That Zuckerberg fella is a moron. Yes, he is the perfect example of how an executive can be a moron.

Instead of lobbying for H1-B, he should lobbying scrapping *ALL* immigration laws altogether and *START FROM SCRATCH*.

No more a single person importing an entire talent-less clan into American.

No more letting radical fuckers, especially those religious fuckers, to come inside America.

But would that Zuckerberg fella do so ? Of course not !

He is a *LIBERAL* and a *LIBERAL* can't do something like that. He must do everything within the "POLITICAL CORRECT" construct - which means, he must lobby for more of the H1-B visas, even though he knows quite well that its the TWO INDIAN COMPANIES which are abusing the H1-B program.

Okay, I can step off my soapbox now.

I am just getting too sick and tired seeing the country that I have adopted turning into a total shitpool because of those liberal assholes.

Re:Most "executives" are morons (0, Flamebait)

L. J. Beauregard (111334) | about 6 months ago | (#46638281)

blah blah blah thanks to the liberals

Stopped reading there.

Re:Most "executives" are morons (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | about 6 months ago | (#46638543)

However, he is correct that the system is fucked up. We desperately need to change our immigration laws back to allowing only talented ppl (i.e. skills that we need), their immediate family (spouse and kids), and kill off the H1-Bs.

Re:Most "executives" are morons (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638431)

What America needs (and what the world needs) are talents, *REAL* talents, but the American immigration laws have been fucked up, thanks to the liberals.

Ah, a political bigot. Thanks for putting that up front and saving me the effort of reading any more. Next you'll be telling us how Obama caused your erectile dysfunction.

Re:Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637569)

Management still doesn't understand why you pay for talent.

Fine. Then Management can figure out how the fuck to stick around managing anything while the lack of talent drives the company into the ground.

The sad part is they'll only feel the wind in their hair as their golden parachute deploys. Their reality check never comes.

Re:Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637651)

Now look here, see.
The 1% didn't become the 1% by giving away money!
I you work really hard, you can get money too!
Fox News tells me so.

Re:Because (1, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | about 6 months ago | (#46637993)

You say that like you don't believe it. Well it is true. Except you have to understand that your work has to creath value in order to accumulate wealth. Doing eveything twice because you screwed up the first time usually doesn't make you lots of money but you sure would be working hard. Now doing everything twice as fast and correctly will if your salary is not locked by a contract or union.

Sometimes you have to change jobs to see the money too. A whopper flopper is going to ve limited in tge amount of pay a lot more than an assembly worker at a factory that gets a base pay plus peice work . Eventually, you may even need to change jobs again when your potential is maxed out.

I'm not fox news but you can believe me. If you work hard and create value, you can make a lot of money

Re:Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638049)

Doing eveything twice because you screwed up the first time usually doesn't make you lots of money but you sure would be working hard. Now doing everything twice as fast and correctly will if your salary is not locked by a contract or union.

No, it won't. I learned this early in school- telling the teacher I finished my work early didn't get me any positive acknowledgement or reward- it only got me assigned more work. In a job, it'll get you assigned more work, AND you won't get promoted- why should they promote you, and then pay 2 or 3 people to do what you do for one salary?

Re:Because (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637741)

Management understands that with offshore workers, you still pay for *management*. Extra tiers of management, in fact, to handle the communications problems with offsite workers, and project reports ,and GANT charts. More managers and layers of management ensure *their* careers, by increasing their head count.

Re:Because (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637799)

Oh. they will soon. Management is not immune to outsourcing either.
The bankers, financiers, CXO crowd that hungered the most for oursourcing had the idea that call centres, mundane manufacturing tasks,simple programming (after specs by US designers of course) would make their companies moire efficient. In their ultimate dream, profit would soar, and what remained in US was just the most critical talent, the CXOs, and of course, US would be the bankers of the world while the rest of the world would do the grunt work.
Did they really think these countries didn't know or could how to handle larger projects?
And did they think the dollars made by chinese and indian companies woud ;NOT be used to acquire banks, manufacturing and tech companies.
Really, didn't they think China had bankers?
I find that the politicians and executives with the 2 year and 3 month view to the future are stupendously arrogant, and woefully unaware of what makes the world go roumd.

Re:Because (5, Interesting)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46637927)

They can start with the CEO's, who are the most globally uncompetitive. Typical American CEO of a large company makes about 400x the average compensation of employees. In the UK it's 45x, and in the rest of the developed world is 10x-20x. Forget about India - just go to Canada and get a CEO for about 5% the cost of a US one. Similar culture, short travel, little time zone difference ... what's not to like?

Re:Because (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 6 months ago | (#46638051)

Talent is only needed for some jobs. For most jobs, an indentured servant who does what he's told (or else!) is much preferable to some free citizen who asks questions and wants the occasional raise. Ideally, they want full-on slaves--who they don't have to pay at all and can beat at will. But those are still illegal (for now).

Isn't the upshot the same? (3, Interesting)

harryjohnston (1118069) | about 6 months ago | (#46637465)

I'm not at all sure I understand the purpose of tech visas, but if the problem they're supposed to solve is that there aren't enough tech workers to fill the available jobs, then surely the upshot is the same either way? The visas issued to Infosys may be used to displace existing US tech workers, but those displaced workers are then available for Facebook to hire.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

InfiniteLoopCounter (1355173) | about 6 months ago | (#46637471)

I'm not at all sure I understand the purpose of tech visas, but if the problem they're supposed to solve is that there aren't enough tech workers to fill the available jobs, then surely the upshot is the same either way? The visas issued to Infosys may be used to displace existing US tech workers, but those displaced workers are then available for Facebook to hire.

Where are the opportunities for recent graduates then?

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

harryjohnston (1118069) | about 6 months ago | (#46637485)

It still works out the same regardless of who the visas are issued to. If there are enough graduates to fill the available jobs, then you don't need any tech visas. That's an entirely different question.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637529)

It's not about headcount, it's about costs. US workers won't work for the low wages that the offshore outsourcing firms pay, unless they're very desperate.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (5, Insightful)

The Mayor (6048) | about 6 months ago | (#46637567)

This is exactly correct. Plus, H1B visa holders are tied to the company that issues the visa. If they leave the company, they must return to their home country. Tech companies like Facebook like to have such indentured servants.

H1B visas serve only to drive down wages for US employees. Additionally, they end up training foreign talent that are later kicked out of the country (after 3 or 6 years, depending upon whether the visa is renewed). They don't help the nation's interests, nor the public's interest. They serve only to increase the profit margins of the large firms.

Get rid of the H1B, and increase the green card slots available to foreign workers, especially the Indians. I've very pro-immigrant, but the H1B visa only provides for indentured servitude.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 6 months ago | (#46637603)

This is exactly correct. Plus, H1B visa holders are tied to the company that issues the visa. If they leave the company, they must return to their home country. Tech companies like Facebook like to have such indentured servants.

H1B visas serve only to drive down wages for US employees. Additionally, they end up training foreign talent that are later kicked out of the country (after 3 or 6 years, depending upon whether the visa is renewed). They don't help the nation's interests, nor the public's interest. They serve only to increase the profit margins of the large firms.

Get rid of the H1B, and increase the green card slots available to foreign workers, especially the Indians. I've very pro-immigrant, but the H1B visa only provides for indentured servitude.

I am seriously worried about the future of IT in the UK. A few years back we used to have half a dozen trainee graduate programmers a year. Now management outsources this work. The people who specify requirements, verify architecture, check for quality, etc are people who used to be trainee programmers a couple of decades ago. From what I have heard this is pretty typical for the industry. What will happen in a couple of decades time? Will we have to go to Indian companies for the whole system, specification, build, compliance, etc? They are the only ones with entry-level programmers gaining experience now, so it seems likely.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (4, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about 6 months ago | (#46637709)

The people that make the decisions don't care what happens in 10 - 20 years; They'll be retired at 50 with £X,000,000 in the bank and a new Ferrari every three months.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637759)

> A few years back we used to have half a dozen trainee graduate programmers a year. Now management outsources this wor

It's because the British, at least *SUCK* at IT. They're incredibly conservative and work only with known technologies, which are unlikely to last more than 5 years in production environments. Any attempts at innovation or even changing procedures is met with incredible layers of confused bureaucracy looking for the legacy of procedures which simply do not *have* a legacy.

The Irish, however, kick ass at IT. The LinuxWorld conference I attended there was a *delight*.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46637999)

Good thing you don't generalize. Would you prefer Irish H-1B's to Indian ones? It makes no difference to me.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

3.5 stripes (578410) | about 6 months ago | (#46638097)

Uh, the Irish are British..

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638209)

Uh, the Irish are British..

Uh...No, they are not.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637793)

Don't worry, you can learn to teach someone to program in three weeks, even if you've never seen a computer before, so by 2024 every UK schoolkid will be a Carmack-level expert. All thanks to Michael Gove, who frankly deserves a knighthood, if not a hereditary peerage.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637681)

Indentured servants ... those words don't mean what you think they mean.

How do H1B visas drive down wages when it's vastly more expensive to hire an H1B than to hire a local? That's the part of the anti-H1B thing I just don't get.

And what point is there in increasing the green card slots available to foreign workers when there are no foreign workers because you got rid of H1B? Or are you looking to bring the workers in on J1 visas (which is what's currently done in practice because of insufficient H1Bs)?

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 6 months ago | (#46637813)

How do H1B visas drive down wages when it's vastly more expensive to hire an H1B than to hire a local? That's the part of the anti-H1B thing I just don't get.

There are some significant costs associated with hiring, however once they're hired you only have to pay them the prevailing wage for the industry. This sounds good, but 'the industry' can be interpreted very broadly, so when you're hiring someone to do realtime C programming they count as being in the same industry as a guy who dropped out of high school and writes PHP. They're also in a very weak position when it comes to bargaining, because if they lose their job they have a very short time to find another sponsor for their visa before they are deported.

If you want to avoid this, the solution is to offer a full work permit to anyone who has skills in one of the shortage industries, so they can go to the US and work at the real (i.e. defined by the market, not defined by some fixed spreadsheet) prevailing wage. Immigrants don't depress wages when they expect the same standard of living and have the same bargaining power as their native colleagues.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (3, Insightful)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 6 months ago | (#46637821)

How do H1B visas drive down wages when it's vastly more expensive to hire an H1B than to hire a local?

It's not - how on earth did you get that idea? The rules say it's supposed to cost the same, but in practice the H1B worker is much cheaper for the vast majority of companies that use them.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638521)

How do H1B visas drive down wages when it's vastly more expensive to hire an H1B than to hire a local?

It's not - how on earth did you get that idea? The rules say it's supposed to cost the same, but in practice the H1B worker is much cheaper for the vast majority of companies that use them.

Every H1B I've known was getting paid hardly more than half of what I was getting paid at the time.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638157)

In a previous life, I saw H-1B workers solely hired because they can be sponsored at $16,000 a year, and where they live like college students. The ONLY reason they get hired on is because they are cheap and they are damn loyal because if they get fired, they get deported.

This means that the H-1Bs tend to be highly passive-aggressive. One incident, when I dealt with them, I'd send a polite E-mail, the guy would change my original response, then CC 4-5 managers about how he felt threatened. Thank $DEITY for e-Discovery because my original E-mail sent was archived. Don't forget the certification shenanigans. John Q. Doe may have that MCSE, but the guy with the H-1B is John R. Doe who is using the same cert ID as someone else, and in reality, is totally clueless.

Of course, they tend to get into places they shouldn't. H-1Bs are cheap, and well-loved by management, so if one gets caught hacking, the incident likely won't be reported, or the reporter faces consequences. To them, slurping source code and copying it offshore will mean more money as a bounty than years of work on US shores, so they won't hesitate to do so.

Of course, there will be the replies that H-1Bs will do 60-100 hours of work willingly to get up to speed. Well, so can a US college student who is desperate to do something with his CS degree other than pour expressos for hipsters at Starbucks.

I second the parent poster: The H-1B program is essentially the same thing as strikebreaking -- hiring workers on the cheap to destroy the salaries people get in an industry. This only hurts the US in the long run as that knowledge and money flies overseas for good.

Instead, as above, increase permanent resident slots, and do the job right.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637691)

This. There is no way I could pay off my college debt at $20k a year, but there are people in India that can live off that wage. Having seen the "quality" of work some of these people put out I stand firmly by "you get what you pay for."

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

harryjohnston (1118069) | about 6 months ago | (#46637551)

... of course, it still makes sense to at least try to allocate the visas sensibly. I'd have thought the obvious approach was to give priority in any given period to the workers who are being offered the highest pay - that should favour the companies with a genuine need over those offering cut-rate replacements to existing workers.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 6 months ago | (#46638061)

I think the problem is that there actually is already enough workers, the shortage is mostly myth caused by either requiremenrs that are not needed or location. More foreign workers are happy to relocate for mediocre pay than US workers.

This also tips the employment numbers in so that the wages can remain lower due to more workers that jobs. Low unemployment usually raises wages as employers need to attract and keep worker from a short supply. With more VISAs, instead of raising wages, they can import more supplies of workers. This also happens to be why so many people who think immigragration is ok but cannot tolorate illegal immigration.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (4, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46637541)

There are plenty of STEM workers to fill the available jobs; I think the last figures put a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of workers to roles. There just aren't enough available at the prices these companies want to pay. Hence offshoring: find a cheaper supply of labour elsewhere.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

harryjohnston (1118069) | about 6 months ago | (#46637577)

I dunno, the salaries shown in the database linked to from the lobbying site don't look too shabby to me. Of course that might all be made up for all I know. Be that as it may, I still don't see the connection to the outsourcing companies. How does the fact that they're getting a large proportion of the allocated visas help prove that the visas aren't really needed?

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (1)

asylumx (881307) | about 6 months ago | (#46637937)

I think the last figures put a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of workers to roles.

What figures were those? Were they regional? All of the US? j/w

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637597)

I'm not at all sure I understand the purpose of tech visas, but if the problem they're supposed to solve is that there aren't enough tech workers to fill the available jobs, then surely the upshot is the same either way? The visas issued to Infosys may be used to displace existing US tech workers, but those displaced workers are then available for Facebook to hire.

Facebook can hire them? Perhaps you missed the part where Facebook isn't just vying for more visas, it's practically championed the entire campaign behind it.

Facebook isn't looking to hire those "expensive" graduates any more than any other company is, which is why cheap labor isn't helping anything but displacing American tech workers into the unemployment line.

All while illegal immigrants also continue to thrive and consume American jobs as we turn a blind eye to that issue. Yes, let's allow even more visas in. I'm sure that's the cheap-ass answer for someone somewhere in never-never-land.

Simple (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 6 months ago | (#46637827)

It's a bargaining chip in wage negotiations. "Don't ask for too much or we'll replace you with someone from overseas" is the implied argument.

If it was really about shortage then it would have gone away when layoffs added large numbers of experienced and skilled people to the pool of available employees.

Re:Isn't the upshot the same? (3, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638047)

The visas issued to Infosys may be used to displace existing US tech workers, but those displaced workers are then available for Facebook to hire.

No, because Infosys uses the H-1B's not just to replace American workers, but to facilitate offshoring. The H-1B's already know how the company works in India, fewer problems from language and cultural differences, etc. Most importantly, the Infosys H-1B's know that if they do a good job on their tour of duty here, they'll be rewarded when they return to India. The Indian Commerce Minister has publicly called the H-1B the "outsourcing visa".

If you're going to screw... (4, Interesting)

Rick in China (2934527) | about 6 months ago | (#46637509)

The American workers out of jobs, at least support American companies in the process, no? I'm not even American, I'm Canadian, so while I don't have a vested interest, I can see and understand the hate. Essentially it makes sense to bring in tech talent with the purpose of filling vacancies that can not otherwise be filled with the domestic talent. It isn't being used for that in many cases, though - rather is used to cut cost and 'get 'er done'. If the gov't is going to enable this cost-cutting advantage, it should make sense to at least offer it to American companies rather than foreign - why would they want to both displace more expensive workers as well as displace them with the intention of supporting a foreign enterprise in the process?

Re:If you're going to screw... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637623)

The American workers out of jobs, at least support American companies in the process, no?

I'm not even American, I'm Canadian, so while I don't have a vested interest, I can see and understand the hate.

Essentially it makes sense to bring in tech talent with the purpose of filling vacancies that can not otherwise be filled with the domestic talent. It isn't being used for that in many cases, though - rather is used to cut cost and 'get 'er done'. If the gov't is going to enable this cost-cutting advantage, it should make sense to at least offer it to American companies rather than foreign - why would they want to both displace more expensive workers as well as displace them with the intention of supporting a foreign enterprise in the process?

An American company that wanted to compete with the wage levels of foreign entities consuming tech positions today would likely be filled with a large percentile of our illegal immigrants. Yes, this is irony on a galactic level, but think about who we pay cheap wages to in the US today. This would be the eventual result as American companies still focus on keeping costs DOWN, and would be backing illegal immigration reform as a result.

Re:If you're going to screw... (2)

C0R1D4N (970153) | about 6 months ago | (#46637835)

People who hire illegal immigrants don't want immigration reform. If the illegals all of a sudden had a legal status and had to pay income taxes and be on the grid, etc they would not be able to work so cheaply.

Re:If you're going to screw... (4, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about 6 months ago | (#46637747)

If you are tiny country or have small population yes it makes sense to bring in talent. When you are the 21st century USA with a plenty big population to fill most roles and a University system that is still considered among the worlds best, no I don't think it makes much sense at all.

How do reconcile a pro-education social policy with labor and economic policies that are opposed to developing your own talent?

The idea the USA *needs* to import tech workers is pure farce. If anything USA needs to put much tighter controls around the use of foreign labor. We should treat labor like any other import, wages paid to foreign workers ought to be taxed heavily. So if a company really really does *need* to bring someone in they *can* but would be heavily discouraged from doing so in other cases. There should be payroll taxes on foreign workers working for US companies in foreign countries as well, although these should be a much lower rate.

Real Immigration on the other hand isn't a problem. If people want to come here, have families here, live here as residents and be citizens; great! Then they are our people, attracting good talent is an investment in our own country.

Its pretty rare that I advocate taxing anything, but imports are an exception, I think we should go back to funding the operation of government primarily through import tariffs and foreign labor should no exception.

Re:If you're going to screw... (3, Insightful)

dbIII (701233) | about 6 months ago | (#46637899)

primarily through import tariffs

The unintended consequences of such a thing on Sugar and Steel completely fucked up both industries, manufacturing, and the health of your countries children. It's an axe to be wielded with care. Overprotection of an industry can lead to putting it on permanent life support, a slow decline, and malign effects on industries that depend upon them.
In case you haven't heard of these examples before, manufacturing moved to where steel was cheaper and expensive corn syrup ended up being cheaper that cane sugar.
There's other things that can go wrong with your suggested approach. Byzantium gave it a try up until 1204AD.

Re:If you're going to screw... (1)

DarkOx (621550) | about 6 months ago | (#46638285)

You don't have to get overly specific. Today we have huge volumes of tarried schedules, rather than pick winners and loosers and try and prop up specific industries, I'd argue the tarried schedule should be limited to a few broad categories; commodities, hard goods, labor, and everything else. One tax rate for each category.

Never for specific products like sugar.

Re:If you're going to screw... (2)

dbIII (701233) | about 6 months ago | (#46638391)

So then you have a very large number of industries on life support. Not a good way to swing that axe. A more delicate approach is probably much better.
You also seem to have missed that those tariffs I mentioned ended up costing money.

Re:If you're going to screw... (4, Informative)

dbIII (701233) | about 6 months ago | (#46637873)

It isn't being used for that in many cases, though

Australia adopted the idea as well, just like many other stupid ideas from the USA and not many good ones. Initially is was to fill the shortfall of doctors after we'd cut the numbers of doctors we were training (a lobby group thought scarcity would be a good way to drive up doctors incomes). Now it's even being used to employ cleaners as "skilled workers" that are supposed to be unavailable in the country. The reality is that mining companies and similar are just importing cheaper employees via such a rort whether there are people available to do the job or not. There are certainly large numbers of unemployed people who could do such a job in the areas where cleaners and other nonskilled or semi-skilled staff are employed on indentured servitude visas.

Re:If you're going to screw... (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638065)

a lobby group thought scarcity would be a good way to drive up doctors incomes

AMA = Australian Medical Association?

Note to non-Americans: the US AMA is the American Medical Association, which is a union with some peer review journals.

Re:If you're going to screw... (0)

gtall (79522) | about 6 months ago | (#46638109)

Australia didn't adopt the idea from the U.S. Both countries were built on immigration and much of that was unskilled. It is in the countries' DNA.

Re:If you're going to screw... (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638105)

it should make sense to at least offer it to American companies rather than foreign

Problem: there really is no such thing as an American company anymore. Also, why should I care whether IBM or Infosys executives and major stock holders get rich? Either way, I'm still out of a job.

Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637513)

As software continues to devour the world, every industry becomes dependent on tech workers to continue to operate. Allowing the active participation of software outsourcing firms in the US labour market via H1B's helps manage wage inflation within the sector.

Re:Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637649)

As software continues to devour the world, every industry becomes dependent on tech workers to continue to operate. Allowing the active participation of software outsourcing firms in the US labour market via H1B's helps manage wage inflation within the sector.

Gee, and for a second there when I read your subject I thought you might have been hinting at effective wage inflation by restricting the amount a CEO can be given in raises and wages. Funny how we scrape together pennies at the bottom while millions are consumed at the top.

Re:Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637707)

Welcome to the Jungle....

Re:Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637849)

It's cheaper to give $100K to a CEO than $100 to each of 10,000 workers. That's why you will always find a greater concern about 10,000 people each getting $100 than about one person getting $100K. Even in programming, you can give the OS 2GB for disc cache without thinking about it, but you have to watch individual MBs on every inbound connection if your web server has 10,000 clients. It's just how numbers work, you can't blame capitalism for math.

Re:Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (1)

lwriemen (763666) | about 6 months ago | (#46637903)

I think your CEO number is way off, which is why your specious argument fails. The myth of fair wages for CEOs is one of the problems with the conservative mantra. Free market ostriches stick their heads in the Fox News sand while the economy visibly deteriorates for the 99%.

Re:Manage Wage Inflation - Pure and simple (1)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 6 months ago | (#46637871)

As software continues to devour the world, every industry becomes dependent on tech workers to continue to operate. Allowing the active participation of software outsourcing firms in the US labour market via H1B's helps manage wage inflation within the sector.

Riiiight. Because wage inflation is such a huge problem in the US. Oh, wait, actually, the US has exactly the opposite problem [dailymail.co.uk] .

Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637519)

When foreign goods are sold locally cheaper because the foreign government subsidises their farmers, the local farmers are hit hard. The same with finished /consumer goods, local industries get hit. The US keeps pushing developing countries to open up their markets so that US made goods can be sold cheap.
So may be its always a give-take relationship. Not that I support hordes of H1B displacing US folks, but its almost analogous to what happens in other areas caused by US companies.

Re:Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 6 months ago | (#46637565)

Yes, that's exactly how "Free Trade" works. It's a global race to the bottom. Companies everywhere lower their costs by leveraging modern communication and shipping to continually move jobs to the places where they can pay the lowest possible amount for labor. Multinational companies have no loyalty to the nations that spawned them. As short-sighted greedoids, they don't realize (or care, what the fuck, they're getting rich) that by impoverishing and reducing their workers, they're chipping away at their own customer base. It's just another case of corporations fouling the Commons, in this case, the global Labor Commons. So we get situations like Wal-Mart workers being paid such low wages that they qualify for food stamps. Remember kids, privatize profits, socialize losses.

Re:Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637789)

Companies everywhere lower their costs by leveraging modern communication and shipping to continually move jobs to the places where they can pay the lowest possible amount for labor.

you are doing the same with every single product you buy when it's your dollars at stake, so i don't see the difference.
Free trade is about identifying and exploiting the potential energy of the system, in the process the imbalance is reduced and profits are made - deal with it.
You are also totally ignoring the gains in the 3rd world. Hundreds of millions of people moved from subsistence farming and get to enjoy the achievements of civilization. If that happened at the expense of few westerners with the oversized sense of entitlement, so be it.

Re:Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638197)

Free trade is about identifying and exploiting the potential energy of the system, in the process the imbalance is reduced and profits are made

What a clever metaphor. Is it supposed to mean something, or is it just a pathetic way to make your argument seem more scientific? To anybody who is dumb enough to buy it, it also has the propaganda effect of making it seem as inevitable as entropy, when in reality it's just the opposite - a matter of policies conceived by politically powerful people.

deal with it

Why?

You are also totally ignoring the gains in the 3rd world

Another myth comforting to free traders. There is no reason that China, for example, can't grow on the basis of internal consumption, just as the US did. I also find it an astounding coincidence that policies which are supposed to benefit the 3rd world, just happen to do so in a way that benefits the already rich in the developed world. There are other approaches, but I assure you that one which doesn't enrich the wealthy will never be enacted.

Re:Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (1)

meta-monkey (321000) | about 6 months ago | (#46638541)

There are other approaches, but I assure you that one which doesn't enrich the wealthy will never be enacted.

Exactly. It is class warfare, and the wealthy class is winning.

H1-Bs are tied to a particular company. The visa holders get deported after a few weeks if they lose their job or quit. Why is that? So the company has leverage over them if they get uppity. It's just a scam to drive down wages, and drive up the profits of the already most profitable corporations in the history of the world. The stock market is booming and unemployment is high? Perfect! They claim "free trade!" but it has nothing to do with free trade. It is not a free market. It is a fascist market wherein large corporations "partner" with government to enact laws to their benefit. That is literally the definition of a fascist economic system. To just roll over and let them do it is to lose the class war.

Fuck 'em. Put up some tariffs and force them to hire American workers, and make it more expensive to produce goods overseas and ship them here so they'll be forced to manufacture products in America and hire Americans. The price of products might go up, but so will wages. "But oh noes that's protectionism what about teh free marketz!?!?!" The alternative is poverty and slavery. There is no free market! It's just about whether the market is perverted to aid the wealthy or whether it's perverted to aid the masses. I vote masses.

Re:Isn't this how Free Trade works!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638117)

Funny- people always bitch about how others are running companies. 'Oh, you're only paying min wage, instead of $100/hour' 'Oh, you hire cheap workers (overseas) instead of expensive workers (here).' 'Oh, you pay so much more to the guy who runs the entire company, than the guy who stocks shelves'.

But the one thing you don't see is one of these whiners starting their own business, paying significantly more than min wage, using local labor, and paying themselves peanuts.

Gee. Why is that?

Very bad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637591)

The H1B typically works for $10.00-17/hr - somewhere around $35k/year.
In addition, they live 3-4 to an apartment, and if they're in the country for
less than a certain number of days (I don't remember the exact number,
somewhere around 150 days), don't pay U.S. Federal income tax. That's
why they return / rotate home at regular intervals.

Not trying to be funny, but the H1B is rotate / passed to similar looking
workers, so 300,000 effectively becomes 600,000 or greater.

It's very hard for a U.S. citizen trying to support a family to compete against
this invasion.

Re:Very bad... (3, Informative)

harryjohnston (1118069) | about 6 months ago | (#46637609)

Have you seen http://www.h1bwage.com/ [h1bwage.com] ?

Re:Very bad... (4, Interesting)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 6 months ago | (#46637905)

Have you seen http://www.h1bwage.com/ [h1bwage.com] ?

According to the site - "h1bwage.com is the online wage library for h1b prevailing wage determinations, and the disclosure databases for other programs."

So it's referencing the standard salaries for positions, and/or the H1B application statements of companies applying for the visas. It in no way reflects what the hired workers actually earn, and is not intended to. Salaries are always "negotiable".

I suspect that some of those figures are what the consulting firm is charging to place one of those working in another company - so the company is paying that amount for the person, but the consulting firm is taking a good portion of it off the top before they actually pay the worker.

Ya know ... (3, Insightful)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about 6 months ago | (#46637593)

... Klobuchar is a Democrat. And these tech CEOs are noted "progressives".

It seems that they think that paying low wages is a great idea ... for them.

Other businesses, mind you, we have to mandate that they pay their employees more. And claim that this will have no effect on the bottom line.

Re:Ya know ... (1)

penix1 (722987) | about 6 months ago | (#46637657)

So what's your point?

That a politician is beholden to the corporations? No news there thanks to the conservative Supreme Court's decision in Citizen's United.

That corporations do everything they can to decrease costs and increase shareholder value? They are required by law to do this. It is their sole purpose for existence.

That a corporation that pays substandard wages has to be forced to pay a wage that allows their employees to survive? I think it is sad that they have to be forced to do that. They scream they can't get talent when in truth what they mean is they can't get talent on the cheap. If they had their way, slavery and child labor would still be practiced.

Re:Ya know ... (1)

DarkOx (621550) | about 6 months ago | (#46637883)

That a politician is beholden to the corporations? No news there thanks to the conservative Supreme Court's decision in Citizen's United.

Want to quit harping about that already. The H1B program existed long before that decision was handed down and it IS A FREE SPEECH issue. I don't think anyone should be barred using their property to promote a cause. Why should some Union be allowed to basically steer unlimited monies to a politician but a corporation not? It makes no sense. As far as campaign finance goes requirements should be for real disclosure, something we don't have today. That would make difference.

Re:Ya know ... (2)

EmagGeek (574360) | about 6 months ago | (#46637699)

Using the Government as a weapon against their competitors is what progressives do. We are fast approaching the establishment of the progressive ruling class, where if you're among the progressive elite, your company gets favorable treatment from government, and a slanted playing field.

Re:Ya know ... (2)

Bruinwar (1034968) | about 6 months ago | (#46637881)

The I-Squared Act of 2013 is not a progressive's bill. It was introduced by Orrin Hatch. Cosponsors are a mix, 14 dems, 11 repugs. Wanna know who is in charge? Follow the money.

Re:Ya know ... (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638227)

Follow the money.

I wish they'd at least make that harder to do. It's so easy to follow the money that it's insulting. Instead of a "let's try to hide it" approach it's a "fuck you, we don't care what you think".

Simple solution (4, Insightful)

Ecuador (740021) | about 6 months ago | (#46637605)

Instead of increasing H1b's which are abused by offshore firms, make a new category for foreigners who hold a graduate degree from a top US school. The US has by far the best Universities in most areas, but the best foreign students often leave the US because of the very restrictive H1b Visa system (employment-tied, application only on April for October start, dependents not eligible for work etc). Why provide world-leading education and then let the best talent go?

Really excellent ! (-1, Troll)

Ochena Pothik (3601351) | about 6 months ago | (#46637607)

Forex Trading [atforexschool.com] team agree with you. They also want to say that all the information you have been provided in the video very useful and hope that others will also benefit from this valuable knowledge. Really excellent ! Thank you for giving such type of nice article. Really excellent !

Re:Really excellent ! (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 6 months ago | (#46637631)

Thanks. Here, let me just click on your spam link. Fuckwit.

Re:Really excellent ! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 6 months ago | (#46637825)

Thank Slashdot for putting the little white bird on a blue background icon next to spammers...

Re:Really excellent ! (1)

3.5 stripes (578410) | about 6 months ago | (#46637695)

I wonder if this guy would qualify for an H1-B?

More proof (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637653)

Further proof that our government does not work for us, it works for the corporatocracy. They have no interest in the common man's problems. This however will be their undoing. Who is going to buy the goods and services these assholes are providing, when we are all broke and unemployed?

As someone who was on H1-B, it's a scam (5, Interesting)

dwillyson (63193) | about 6 months ago | (#46637655)

As someone who worked on an H1-B visa about 10 years back in Silicon Valley, i can confirm that these visas are being misused by IT consulting companies. They take the majority of these visas and then use them as baits in india for IT professionals. Most indian IT companies are nothing but cheap labour shops. If there is a dearth of IT professionals, make H1-B non-employer specific. All it does is make you a bonded labourer for 4-6 years with your employer who promises to process your green card while paying you a low salary. This is a big scam and i hope enough people take notice so that something is done about it. Most people on H1-B won't speak about it cause they don't want to go back home or lose their job. This is what keeps it going.

Re:As someone who was on H1-B, it's a scam (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638237)

Thank you for being so honest about this. Seriously - absolutely no snark meant.

Re:As someone who was on H1-B, it's a scam (1)

dwillyson (63193) | about 6 months ago | (#46638367)

None taken. Cheers :)

I don't *want* US workers (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637693)

I donate a LOT of money to FWD.us to try to get the H1-B limits increased. Why? Because while my company does do business in the US, I despise US workers - who are generally a bunch of self-important, entitled brats who think they are God's gift to development. The worst part? They are simply lazy. My God are Americans lazy. Show up at 8:45... leave at 4:15... hour and half lunch.. sitting around surfing the Internet all day while finding a few minutes here and there to do some work in between facebook posts.

I don't have these problems at our Bangalore design center. I do bring a lot of people over on L-1 visas, but we must have H1-B limits increased, or removed altogether, so we can engage talented resources already living in the US. It's inconvenient to hire someone in India for placement in the US on an L-1 since they have to work for a year before they are eligible.

Re:I don't *want* US workers (4, Interesting)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 6 months ago | (#46638029)

I donate a LOT of money to FWD.us to try to get the H1-B limits increased. Why? Because while my company does do business in the US, I despise US workers - who are generally a bunch of self-important, entitled brats who think they are God's gift to development. The worst part? They are simply lazy. My God are Americans lazy. Show up at 8:45... leave at 4:15... hour and half lunch.. sitting around surfing the Internet all day while finding a few minutes here and there to do some work in between facebook posts.

And yet their output is still just as high in quantity and orders of magnitude higher in quality than anything that comes out of your 14-hour-day Bangalore sweatshop. I have to use 5 of those guys to do the work of 1 American developer, and it's still not a deal, because it has to be sent back 5 or 6 times for fixes just to reach the level of "barely acceptable".

You're still doing business in the US because there are still idiots that thing they're getting a deal. Boeing sure learned their lesson after their Dreamliner got grounded when the steaming pile of crap that HCL delivered was so bad they had to hire a whole new set of American developers to fix it. And yet, incredibly, after multiple failed projects like that which required total re-write to fix, HCL is somehow still getting work.

Boeing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638493)

Boeing was a highly sofisticated peice of software and even Ameican companies and developers have problems with that - See Lockheed and F-22: MAJOR pr,oblems and there were no H1-bs because it's a defense project.

Now as for other companies and businesses, it's a different story. I have witnessed the problems you mentioned first hand. Example, back in the Y2K days the Indian firm who was charged with fixing the date problem did so EVERYWHERE regardless if it was needed or not; meaning, they broke some code that worked.

Here's the rub - even though we had to go through and fix their screwups, it was still cost effective because of the amount of code that DID have to be changed.

I wish - really wish - I could say that the parent is 100% that offshoring is not cost effective, but the fact of the matter, for most rojects, it is. And when you consider that the norm in the software industry is to give the customer shit and fix later, there is not any reason to change.

There are hundreds of millions of smart people in this World and tens of millions of very smart people - most are very very poor. We are doomed to spiral down to the bottom - except for the people who own the businesses that arbitrage the labor - in the short term.

Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46637791)

Zuckerturd is in it with big government who are hellbent in ruining that country and any other Western country.

Prove its about talent (3, Interesting)

QuantumRiff (120817) | about 6 months ago | (#46637815)

If the claim is that there is a shortage of talent, then simply add a fee to the process, that is roughly equivalent to a years worth of college education in the state where the job is located, for every year the H1B worker works, into a scholarship program for that industry/disipline. Facebook should jump at the chance to make college more affordable for CS majors, since they seem to need so many of them. And hey, if the student can graduate without "mortgage level" loans, they can actually afford to work for less money.

You've got it all wrong. (3, Interesting)

Required Snark (1702878) | about 6 months ago | (#46637839)

This isn't selling out resident workers, both green card holders and citizens. It's capitalism in action.

The US government is for sale, and the highest bidders get what they pay for. You buy enough legislation (and legislators) and you can make anything legal.

Want to make more money in the short run by gutting STEM employment and destroying US based intellectual capitial? No problem! (Just look at IBM).

Want to pay no US taxes while you plaster US flags on your equipment? You don't even have to make the flags in the US! (Caterpillar, a proud US giant.)

It really is equal opportunity at work. You don't even have to be a US company to buy what you want.

Stop whining, it's unpatriotic. You obviously don't love the US if you can't afford to buy you own slice of the American Dream. Tata Consultancy Services is clearly a much more important American Enterprise then any of the mere citizens who do useless things like live, vote and pay taxes in the US.

It's not like there is a "Government of the People, by the People and For the People" or any other nonsense like that.

Facebook (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about 6 months ago | (#46637861)

This is exactly why Zuck and his coven are such scum. It also proves that being filthy rich makes you more of an addict than a heroin user; you can *never* get enough money, and you'll fuck over your own fellow citizens to gain more.

Re:Facebook (1)

l0n3s0m3phr34k (2613107) | about 6 months ago | (#46637929)

a real heroin addict can "never" get enough heroin either, but then they die from it. Unfortunately, I don't think Zucky will die from too much money, at least until the Revolution and his head rolls into the guillotine basket.

Re:Facebook (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 6 months ago | (#46638273)

Screw guillotines - I think the rich who feel they're so entitled should be made to live on a minimum wage income for the rest of their lives. It's less messy, and far more poetic justice.

At least outsourcing to India you benefit India (1)

fmoliveira (979051) | about 6 months ago | (#46637991)

Traditional outsourcing at least help India's economy. H1B is bad for americans with far less benefit for India. The solution is for poor countries to develop. Americans are crying while their bellies are full.

quality in outsourcing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638035)

People frequently claim in slashdot that there is no quality in 3rd world software development. The problem I see as someone living in Brazil is that outsourcing firms limit their search for people that speaks english with fluency. And there are very few people that speaks english here.

Re:quality in outsourcing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638377)

>And there are very few people that speak english here.
Nobody wants to have to learn portuguese in order to get the new payroll system built

The big picture (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638037)

The whole concept of "they stole our jobs!" is so short sighted and stupid.

As long as skilled workers enter the country the country as a whole benefits. It does not matter if they replace local workers or not. The skilled local workers will find employment elsewhere.
Jobs are also not static, it's not like there are 100 jobs and if 12 are taken by foreigners then there are only 88 left. Thinking in these categories is just ridiculous.
Jobs are dynamic and (with a time delay) are created by supply and demand. If 12 skilled people immigrate then these 12 people will spend their wages and increase demand for other jobs. They will productively add to the economy and the country as a whole benefits.
Getting as many skilled people as possible into the country while at the same time getting rid of as many unskilled people as possible should be the goal of employment politics. Which jobs they replace and whether locals could do these or not should not at all be a factor.

That being said there are pretty good arguments against H1B, mainly the "be a slave to the company that hired you" parts of it.
The ideal solution would be a work permit for anyone with a higher income than [factor bigger than 1 times average national income], no matter where they are from. In case of job loss they have one year to find a different job which still places them high enough above the average income or they have to leave the country.

Not a nice system, but efficient and it maximises benefits to the national economy. With the added benefit of not discriminating against anyone.

Shortage of Talent Shortage of Cheap Talent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638041)

At the end of the day, this is simple economics. Given the current talent pool, the market has reached a price point deemed fair. At that point, we may not use 100% of available talent, and not 100% of possible jobs may be filled, but this is the balance. If the price lowered we may see more of the resources utilized or if price increased we may see more of the jobs left unfilled.

This debate is all about introducing a new dynamic into this market. By adding to the labor pool, prices are artificially lowered and more of the jobs are filled (jobs which were not willing to pay the market rate previously). This is not unlike how illegal immigration has lowered the price point of so called low skill labor jobs and now we have a problem that citizens in that labor pool struggle to survive (though most of those jobs are filled and it results in lower priced goods).

A great parallel is the argument on the other end of the labor market that we need immigration reform to provide labor for the jobs that "Americans just won't do". Perhaps, these are simply jobs that "Americans just won't do for low pay". I suggest we let the market dictate the wages (in both tech and unskilled labor).

It's going to get much worse (4, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | about 6 months ago | (#46638345)

There are still good jobs for American tech workers, in America.

Just wait until we hit the next economic bump.

When wages really get depressed, Americans will stop studying for tech. Then US employers will point to the declining enrollment and scream that Americans are too stupid, and lazy, to study tech subject. The only answer will be to import more visa workers.

The more visa workers the US lets in, the more US workers will feel out of place in their own work environments. Then it will get easier to offshore tech jobs for even bigger savings. Then, due to technology transfer, foreign companies will take over - this is already happening in China.

If you think things are bad now, just wait for about ten years.
 

Workers don't want to move where jobs are! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46638459)

Shortages of skilled labor happen because people don't want to move to states or locations where jobs are. When company has closed it's office in Illinois and offered jobs in Kentucky not one engineer signed up to move. Some went to CA some to FL and most took a pay-cut and stayed in Illinois.

Everyone will have different reason why they didn't want to live in Kentucky but for few of my friends with kids it was school system. Businesses settle where taxes are low or where they they get most tax incentives which means states that, to keep taxes low and spend little for social services (like education, medical). And, other states are too religious for people with science degree.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>