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

#171

Post by throwaway28473 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:29 AM UTC

bediger4000 wrote: post #169

throwaway28473 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ll also be watching American businesses dying as they lose to global competitors who operate in a much more favourable regulatory environment, because their country doesn’t force them to pay 150k per engineer.

Where is this favorable-to-corporations regulatory environment? Europe? UK? Australia? Canada? I'm having trouble thinking of a single western democracy that has a looser regulatory environment than the US. But I'd love to be educated.

Why does it have to be a western democracy? Chinese companies are a good example - Cisco is rapidly losing market share to Huawei, who can employ skilled workers at a fraction of the price.

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

#172

Post by rhacker » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:31 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #136

rhacker wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when those people are 100% remote, don't add up to 20-30k per head, and are paid 1/10 the cost of a US citizen?

That’s not how it works. DOL sets a floor to salaries based on the US prevailing wage. If any H1-B holder is paying 1/10th of what a US worker costs, they are breaking the law.

Oh yeah I realize that - just going on the extended not just Cisco, and not just H1-B - there are companies right now in the US that are hiring outside firms or buying such firms employing 20-40 pakistani "employees" for software development. The money is basically just funnelling outside the US at incredible speeds. That software is then sold to US companies at 10 times the price.

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

#173

Post by h4b4n3r0 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:34 AM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #43

hart_russell wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company falls under US jurisdiction, it's incumbent upon policy makers to put Americans first

Why not hire the best no matter where they come from? I never understand why locals should get preferential treatment. Companies do business, not philanthropy.

>> Why not hire the best no matter where they come from?

Here's what H1-B actually works if you hire "the best": you hire people who are way overqualified for the job, and pay them peanuts while they are on H1-B. "But H1-B requires that they are paid no less than US workers" you might reasonably object. There's a loophole for that: just hire them at a way lower job ladder level than an American would consider adequate, and don't promote them as much. It's not like they have much of a choice anyway: they can either work here or GTFO to their country of origin within 2 weeks.

I liked Trump's proposal that only the highest paid positions get H1-B visas. That way economic incentives essentially turn H1-B into an auction for the truly great people, and make life easier for fresh US grads. I'm not sure what happened to that proposal. It was probably smothered in the crib by FANG lobbyists.

Full disclosure: I'm a former H1-B, now a naturalized US citizen.

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

#174

Post by closeparen » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:38 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #49

ekianjo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not hire the best no matter where they come from? I never understand why locals should get preferential treatment. Companies do business, not philanthropy.

Companies follow the law of the land, written by government for the benefit of its citizens (and not everyone can be a citizen; resource limits, cultural integration, those such issues, see the EU for examples of those challenges and why they limit economic migrants). Companies should obey the law, or leave and be prohibited from operating in the jurisdiction (China does this successfully). Edit: My apologies for rei…

>and not everyone can be a citizen; resource limits, cultural integration, those such issues, see the EU for examples of those challenges and why they limit economic migrants

Concern about the "challenges" of too many brown people in your country is usually just called "racism."

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

#175

Post by remarkEon » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:41 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #168

remarkEon wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The term is absolutely not used exclusively to refer to citizens, ... It absolutely is used exclusively to refer to citizens by an overwhelming majority of people who would use that term. Attempting to split off "citizens" from "natives and inhabitants" is a naked attempt at trying to redefine a word that carries significant meaning to further a specific agenda. >...citizenship is an arbitrary legal distinction Says…

Again, I am explicitly not making a semantic argument. I made my point about citizenship clear, and it does not depend on any particular definition of the word “American.” I am saying that the choice of legal definition of citizenship is arbitrary, not that it is poorly-defined. Legal definitions vary a lot from country to country. Again, I’m saying it’s a bad choice for the threshold at which a government should pro…

Because without some distinction of who has responsibilities and obligations to the Sovereign state then we can't have any sort of consistency at all in how we govern ourselves. This is a concept that has deep philosophical underpinnings, coming from Aristotle to Plato and elsewhere. To put in bluntly: Citizens have skin in the game in a way "inhabitants" don't. If the social fabric of a nation-state starts to break down, the Citizens are the ones that have to deal with the consequences. The only way we've come up with to denote who has to deal with this is the Citizenship marker.

I'm curious. Where is this new belief that "Citizenship" is a concept that needs to be blown up coming from? It appears to have become quite common over the last couple years. It has to be coming from somewhere.

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

#176

Post by screye » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:42 AM UTC

DrJokepu wrote: post #90

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…

> is actually causing the best jobs to shift more to immigrants and less to Americans. Just to be clear: people on H-1B are not immigrants as it is a non-immigrant visa. They only become immigrants if and when they adjust status and get a green card at which point none of the limitations you listed will apply anymore.

Green cards take 20+ years now a days. It isn't a viable option anymore .

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

#177

Post by bediger4000 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:43 AM UTC

throwaway28473 wrote: post #171

bediger4000 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is this favorable-to-corporations regulatory environment? Europe? UK? Australia? Canada? I'm having trouble thinking of a single western democracy that has a looser regulatory environment than the US. But I'd love to be educated.

Why does it have to be a western democracy? Chinese companies are a good example - Cisco is rapidly losing market share to Huawei, who can employ skilled workers at a fraction of the price.

Huawei doesn't count. China has a heavily managed economy. If Huawei employs workers at a fraction of the cost, it's not because Indians, Vietnamese and Turkish tech workers are flocking to Shenzen instead of San Jose. It's because the Chinese government wants it that way.

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

#178

Post by dang » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:45 AM UTC

imbusy111 wrote: post #92

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…

You seem to be delusional thinking that there is such a thing as an American. USA is the land of immigrants and as long as the best people come to US, it is the place to be. Ban the immigrants and the country loses its edge.

No personal swipes on HN, please.

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

#179

Post by dang » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:45 AM UTC

mvc wrote: post #119

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 i…

Please do not be uncivil or use HN for political battle.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#180

Post by Spooky23 » Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 3:46 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #101

toast_coder wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think this only effects IT? You think salary negotiations are somehow immune to those same price pressures when we are dealing with the ppl who mow lawns, pick produce, and clean bathrooms?

The OP likely is talking about tech because it's what he knows. But generally, as a Canadian who has hired immigration lawyers and knows the US immigration process well, you are never getting into the US to "mow lawns, pick produce, and clean bathrooms"... almost all the long term Visas require an advanced degree (4yrs of university) or equivalent in experience in an industry in high demand (doctors, engineers, etc).…

That’s true of certain visas. There are a variety of different visas.

I grew up next to an orchard that almost exclusively used Jamaican guest workers to pick apples and other fruit. Same thing with horse tracks, etc. There is no farm operating at any significant scale that isn’t using migrant labor, mostly legal.