Trying to play a devil's advocate, I might be downvoted here right away. Disclosure: I am not going to be affected by this, but I do work in tech industry. 1. With the decline of low-wage tech workers, where do you think the mundane/non-value added work they do will go? Not everything will/can be outsourced, and you don't want to your USD 130K employee to do that. There is a real scarcity of tech skilled workers in t…
If you used to pay $50k for low-end tech jobs, you can probably find someone in the US to do it for $70k. The H1B is meant to fill skill gaps, NOT save money on those skills.
If a company can't operate by paying market rates, that's a business model problem.
I actually think this will result in accelerating India's growth in the tech sector. There might be slight downturn in the shorter term for the services sector but this will be compensated by the product companies. Once the above happens, I actually think it will have a net negative effect for the US tech sector. Yes you can still find the best engineers to come to the US, however once salaries start rising in the de…
This is because of the seniority system put in place by the unions. They pilots fly over seas as there are not a lot of jobs at major airlines flying the big planes domestically.
Yes there are not a lot of jobs because the airline sector doesn't have much growth in the US. Compare that with the the economies of developing countries, they are growing rapidly. Another example from India is Indigo (which is a major domestic airline) recently ordered close to 200 A320 airplanes which a massive bet on growth.
I would think the same thing will happen to the tech sector in the longer term where the demand and growth will go to Asia.
130k is indeed too high. To fight the most egregious abusers 100k would have been enough. Not everybody works in Silicon Valley IT, and even there the indian bodyshops offered only Many other industries rely on foreign talent, and many cannot pay 130k, but 100k would be fine IMHO.
Honestly, I don't think it's too high at all. If you view the H1B the way it was sold to the US public - as a visa to get very high talent people who can't be found in adequate numbers among the existing US workforce - 130k honestly sounds low to me. Keep in mind, a family of 4 in San Francisco that earns 130k a year (family income) qualifies for direct housing subsidies. Many of these visas will be allocated to SF/v…
But that's the most important issue here I think. This might be appropriate, at the most, for SFO and possibly NYC. But what about the rest of the country where the cost of living is much lower? I (an Indian H1B holder) worked in WI, where I made 73K as a fresher and was able to have a nice apartment and a good life in general and save half of my salary. I think, while the current 60K minimum pay may be too low, 130K is too high for most of the country. 100K might be more practical. Even better would be a process which takes the local cost of living into account, instead of an absolute minimum (which might get too complicated, I guess).
Considering that foreign counties are providing free tuition to qualifying students and then sending them here to get better paying jobs, I can only be supportive. Although, in the long run I'd prefer to see tuition be free at public schools here as well.
We seem to have gotten things all around ass backwards these days. We get high-end candidates from Asia and low-end candidates from Mexico, so Americans are being squeezed on both ends.
Trying to play a devil's advocate, I might be downvoted here right away. Disclosure: I am not going to be affected by this, but I do work in tech industry. 1. With the decline of low-wage tech workers, where do you think the mundane/non-value added work they do will go? Not everything will/can be outsourced, and you don't want to your USD 130K employee to do that. There is a real scarcity of tech skilled workers in t…
If you used to pay $50k for low-end tech jobs, you can probably find someone in the US to do it for $70k. The H1B is meant to fill skill gaps, NOT save money on those skills. If a company can't operate by paying market rates, that's a business model problem.
So that change in business model will likely mean more outsourcing of jobs. The fundamental goal of any company is to save money.
If you used to pay $50k for low-end tech jobs, you can probably find someone in the US to do it for $70k. The H1B is meant to fill skill gaps, NOT save money on those skills. If a company can't operate by paying market rates, that's a business model problem.
So that change in business model will likely mean more outsourcing of jobs. The fundamental goal of any company is to save money.
The low-skill parts will just be automated. We will source a grouping of high-skill work to someone that deserves a higher salary, and now we have a financial incentive to automate work that should have been automated already.
I have 2 years exp in medium sized product company (which has global market) in India. I have developed iOS apps, react app, web app in django (basically full stack). have experience in python, java, javascript and swift. I applied for few good colleges (UCSD, UT Austin, Carnige Mellon, GATech, Arizona state) to specialize in Machine Learning in US. Should I change my plans (I have to spend anywhere from 40-90 lakh R…
ex-H1B here, You have good skills, once you graduate, you will have to depend on your luck to get into the H1B system currently. Why don't you get MS from good universities in Canada and enter the express entry immigration system which values your skills unlike H1B system which depends on luck ?
So that change in business model will likely mean more outsourcing of jobs. The fundamental goal of any company is to save money.
The low-skill parts will just be automated. We will source a grouping of high-skill work to someone that deserves a higher salary, and now we have a financial incentive to automate work that should have been automated already.
Is "freaks out" really appropriate for a news piece title? Did a seventeen year old girl write this? Yikes.
I don't mind critiques of language formality or effectiveness, etc, but no need to police or denigrate young women. Keep misogyny out of it.
Are you not the one dragging mysogyny into the conversation? There's nothing wrong with a 17 year old speaking in this fashion and GP didn't say there was. They only said journalists shouldn't.
They also implied it's more commonly found among females. Again, only a comment on what they perceive; there's nothing illegal or unexpected with a 17 year old saying "like, omg, freaks out".