Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers • Hacker News Board

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#111

Post by AlexB138 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 12:54 AM UTC

throwaway28473 wrote: post #16

Honest question: if immigrants are willing to do the same job for less money, why do US citizens deserve special treatment and higher wages? Why should companies be forced to not hire in an economically optimal way?

Because that is a race to the bottom for Americans. Americans enjoy a very high standard of living, and having to normalize your wage expectation with people from countries with significantly lower standards of living would destroy that. American companies operate according to American laws, and American laws should be setup in the interest of Americans, not as some charity for the world.

As to "deserve", American citizens also paid the taxes that supplied the infrastructure, education system, legal system, police, etc that allows these companies to grow. That aside, America is a sovereign country, and no one but its citizens has any right to expect it to act in their interest.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#112

Post by baddox » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 12:55 AM UTC

akarma wrote: post #26

throwaway28473 wrote: post #16

Honest question: if immigrants are willing to do the same job for less money, why do US citizens deserve special treatment and higher wages? Why should companies be forced to not hire in an economically optimal way?

I think the simpler form of that question is "what's wrong with globalism?", to which there's many answers. One of the foremost would be that an American company should support the livelihoods of the American people, especially as long as other countries like China wouldn't allow an American to work so easily in the reverse situation. It's just a natural tribal instinct, also, to care more for the welfare of your nei…

> an American company should support the livelihoods of the American people

And people who are living and working in America are American, they may just not be citizens. Citizenship is itself an arbitrary legal distinction made by the government. The vast majority of citizens received their citizenship by being born in the country rather than by any effort or merit on their part. So the claim becomes "an American company should support the livelihoods of people born within the borders of America," which I think is pretty clearly an arbitrary claim that needs a lot of explanation before I'll accept it as reasonable.

> It's just a natural tribal instinct, also, to care more for the welfare of your neighbor than someone across the world.

We're talking about work visas, which means those people move here and thus become your neighbors, so you'd have to extend that "natural tribal instinct" defense beyond place of residence.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#113

Post by baddox » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 12:56 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #110

baddox wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> written by government for the benefit of its citizens But why, or perhaps more importantly, why should this be the case? Why should citizenship (which is itself an arbitrary legal distinction made by the government) mean a person is more deserving of anything than non-citizen residents? It's not like naturalized citizens did anything to earn their citizenship.

Because citizens are stakeholders in their government. Everyone else is not. Naturalized citizens earn their citizenship through a well defined process [1]. [1] https://www.usa.gov/become-us-citizen#item-36212 > The decision to apply is a significant one. Citizenship offers many benefits and equally important responsibilities. By applying, you are demonstrating your commitment to this country and our form of governme…

How so? Because citizens can vote? Because citizens have some legal protections that don't apply to non-citizens? Doesn't that mean that non-citizens actually have more of a stake in the competence and behavior of the government because they have much more to lose from certain government actions?

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#114

Post by toomuchtodo » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 12:58 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #113

toomuchtodo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because citizens are stakeholders in their government. Everyone else is not. Naturalized citizens earn their citizenship through a well defined process [1]. [1] https://www.usa.gov/become-us-citizen#item-36212 > The decision to apply is a significant one. Citizenship offers many benefits and equally important responsibilities. By applying, you are demonstrating your commitment to this country and our form of governme…

How so? Because citizens can vote? Because citizens have some legal protections that don't apply to non-citizens? Doesn't that mean that non-citizens actually have more of a stake in the competence and behavior of the government because they have much more to lose from certain government actions?

I'm unsure how we can argue this any further. You're arguing "what supports the existence of the concept of citizenship and a sovereign nation". That is the legal framework (across nations) we've agreed upon.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#115

Post by throwaway28473 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 12:58 AM UTC

clairamerican12 wrote: post #94

throwaway28473 wrote: post #16

Honest question: if immigrants are willing to do the same job for less money, why do US citizens deserve special treatment and higher wages? Why should companies be forced to not hire in an economically optimal way?

Because the United States is a sovereign nation founded for the benefit of its citizens and their posterity, not an economic zone for the benefit of the profit of transnational corporations that only exist the way they do because of the legal system, civic institutions, international influence, and military power of the US.

In the long term, Cisco needs to be competitive in the global marketplace to survive. When you force companies like Cisco to pay above market rates, it benefits American workers in the short term but over time the company will lose to e.g. Huawei who are operating in a much more favourable regulatory environment. At that point, America loses in a big way.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#116

Post by mjevans » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 1:00 AM UTC

gerdesj wrote: post #24

uissna wrote: post #10

This is an open secret in tech. Visa holders have less job offers to negotiate with, less job mobility, and consequently get paid less. Companies preferentially hire them over Americans. Further, the recent actions making harder for "body shops" like Infosys are actually helping big tech companies win more visa lotteries. This means the recent action that was supposed to help American workers, is actually causing the…

America first or people first?

Put /people/ first (and by proxy also the environment; because people need it); then require the companies to treat all employees equally.

Add a tax on any imports that do NOT put people first, but use the proceeds to fund efforts to improve the lives of all.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#117

Post by flukus » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 1:04 AM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #20

uissna wrote: post #10

This is an open secret in tech. Visa holders have less job offers to negotiate with, less job mobility, and consequently get paid less. Companies preferentially hire them over Americans. Further, the recent actions making harder for "body shops" like Infosys are actually helping big tech companies win more visa lotteries. This means the recent action that was supposed to help American workers, is actually causing the…

The real secret is that this is the only thing that keeps tech onshore. No H1? No problem, move the function offshore.

> The real secret is that this is the only thing that keeps tech onshore.

If this was the only thing it would have gone offshore more than a decade ago. The reason is hasn't gone offshore is because the results are terrible for a number of reasons, with precious few success stories. It is a tried and failed technique to cut software costs.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#118

Post by jcafe » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 1:11 AM UTC

ctrlaltdestroy wrote: post #100

jcafe wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. I jumped to conclusions. I just assumed they were h1b's because of their thick/strong accents and unamericanized names.

So just being on H1B is bad now?

No? I neither said nor implied anything negative about the character of h1b's.

Bloomberg writes article about Cisco's bias for hiring h1b's over US workers.

I mention my anecdotal experience with Bloomberg where nearly everyone I interacted with was not US born and had thick accents.

I thought the irony was funny. Don't twist my words.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#119

Post by mvc » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 1:13 AM UTC

uissna wrote: post #10

This is an open secret in tech. Visa holders have less job offers to negotiate with, less job mobility, and consequently get paid less. Companies preferentially hire them over Americans. Further, the recent actions making harder for "body shops" like Infosys are actually helping big tech companies win more visa lotteries. This means the recent action that was supposed to help American workers, is actually causing the…

> I am not anti immigrant but the immigration system disproportionately hurts American software engineers and American tech

Cry me a river. Do you also complain about internal migration towards cities like San Francisco and Boston. It's the same principal at play. Tech workers from all over the US flock to cities where the wealth is. Tech workers from around the world flock to the US because that's where the wealth is. It's not because we like stealing your job.

Developing software is an investment and the people that fund the investment seem to prefer (at least the core of the team) to live nearby. But if you put a hard-stop on immigration. Or if it gets too expensive for people to live nearby, they might just start looking for the talent wherever it is like @dhh.

Bring it on.

Re: Cisco Said to Be Cited for Bias Against U.S. Workers

#120

Post by petilon » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 1:17 AM UTC

If immigrants are depressing salaries, how do you explain $120,000 (base + stock + bonus) for fresh graduates, paid by Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, etc? https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/05/heres-how-much-new-grads-wil...

It's a hardened belief that jobs are a zero-sum game — and from this arises the idea that every skilled immigrant takes away a job from a U.S. worker. This isn't true. More skilled, educated workers will actually add to the economy — and grow the economy.

Some companies abuse the system, and the abuse must be stopped. But immigration of the best and the brightest is what made this country a superpower, and must be encouraged.