61–70 of 371 posts
If I want to hire a software developer from abroad and I'm willing to pay him above-market rates relative to similar jobs, that should demonstrate that I'm hiring that person because of his skills/knowledge rather than trying to cut costs.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that this may not be an altogether bad thing. From the article: "The foreign work visas were originally established to help U.S. companies recruit from abroad when they couldn’t find qualified local workers. But in recent years, there have been allegations the programs have been abused to bring in cheaper workers from overseas to fill jobs that otherwise may go to Americans…
Here's an alternate proposal. Suppose it would cost $70k for the wrong type of people to provide labor, and $100k for the right type of person to provide labor.
Lets continue having labor sold by the lowest cost provider. But then lets engage in direct wealth transfers; we'll have the government directly send $30k to the high income software engineers who might have been able to do the same job less efficiently.
This is a more or less equivalent scheme to transfer wealth from taxpayers to high income people. Do you have any objection to this scheme? If so, why does your objection not apply equally well to your protectionist scheme?
I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that this may not be an altogether bad thing. From the article: "The foreign work visas were originally established to help U.S. companies recruit from abroad when they couldn’t find qualified local workers. But in recent years, there have been allegations the programs have been abused to bring in cheaper workers from overseas to fill jobs that otherwise may go to Americans…
I am not sure how many proud Americans who would sign up for those positions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good for software developers. Not so much for large companies that want to drive down salaries through indentured servitude (H1B).
No it's not that good for software developers or anyone really. Many of those hired on H1B are doing roles for which they simply can't get enough local talent. And so all that is going to happen is that companies are going to shift entire projects offshore or simply not take on as many projects. There does need to be reform. But frankly given the chaotic manner in which the Trump administration is crafting and implem…
It feels good to tell ourselves we didn't hire locally because there wasn't enough talent when in many cases its just far easier to accept a recruiters suggestions where multiple recruiters simply undercut each other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good for software developers. Not so much for large companies that want to drive down salaries through indentured servitude (H1B).
No it's not that good for software developers or anyone really. Many of those hired on H1B are doing roles for which they simply can't get enough local talent. And so all that is going to happen is that companies are going to shift entire projects offshore or simply not take on as many projects. There does need to be reform. But frankly given the chaotic manner in which the Trump administration is crafting and implem…
So it's not just a way to get regular software developers at a cheap price? OK let's raise the minimum salary requirement for H1B visas to $120k.
Why would SV clash with Trump on this? This seems like a sensible solution to the problem and one I've seen posted multiple times here on HN.
I have been reading for years how broken the current system is, so I would bet that there is a market for that. The issue is the motivation behind the change. What if the changes are designed to please an electorate that is not directly impacted but they just really really want to see some heads rolling? There are some serious credibility issues with the current US govt. Left or right, populists pretend to swing a ma…
He has a long track record of viciously attacking those whom attack him. Could well be payback for many of the SV companies that criticised him both publicly and privately e.g. Lisa Jackson from Apple meeting with Kushner/Ivanka this week.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or how much developer employment will fall? (Two sides of the same coin.)
Surely you only get more unemployment when its artificially increased by law. There would be nothing stopping a individual developer accepting a lower salary. But probably won't because companies are desperate for them.
Then consider the second-order effects. When wages rise, some development tasks are no longer worth performing, because they cost more than the value they create. In theory whole industries could become unsustainable if developers are very scarce, with knock-on effects on other professions.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that this may not be an altogether bad thing. From the article: "The foreign work visas were originally established to help U.S. companies recruit from abroad when they couldn’t find qualified local workers. But in recent years, there have been allegations the programs have been abused to bring in cheaper workers from overseas to fill jobs that otherwise may go to Americans…
When companies like Tata are fulfilling government contracts, they _should_ be filling those positions with local labour at local rates. Here's an alternate proposal. Suppose it would cost $70k for the wrong type of people to provide labor, and $100k for the right type of person to provide labor. Lets continue having labor sold by the lowest cost provider. But then lets engage in direct wealth transfers; we'll have t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why assume a specialized job "won't be filled", but a job were "the exact same package the immigrant would have been on" is offered will? I believe H1B visas are currently used to get workers who accept lower-than-average wages; Hence the same jobs offered to non H1B workers at that level won't be attractive.
H1B visas are generally used for cheap labour. L1 and L2 visas are used for workers with "specialized knowledge" who are necessary because is no local option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was under the impression that an L1 or L2 currently required a candidate to have "specialist knowledge" that a company wouldn't be able to recruit domestically anyway? I could be misunderstanding, but isn't this just bringing the h1b in line with that?
"specialist knowledge" makes sense in L1 because L1 is for intra-company transfer. You are already working for this company (outside of the US), so it's possible that you have some "specialist knowledge" about the technology this company uses, and if they transfer you to the US instead of a local new hire, it saves the company money and time to train the new hire. H1b is not for intra-company transfer so this doesn't…
The latter being easier to demonstrate, not sure quite how you'd convince the govt that Candidate X is a superb programmer or whatever.
Guess we can look forward to whiteboard tree shaking and fizzbuzz at the airport! ;)