Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 279 posts

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

#191

Post by bediger4000 »

throwaway28473 wrote: post #181
bediger4000 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why does the reason matter? If Cisco isn’t competitive, they die. How do you propose they stay in business when Huawei is selling the same thing for half the price?

I dunno, maybe get Trump to executive order lower salaries for Cisco employees? That would be roughly equivalent to the Chinese situation.

Alternatively, the USA as a country could put some effort into education, so as to be self-sufficient in available, skilled workers.

But you're simplifying things - do we really know that lack of cheap Indian H1-B or L1 workers is what's killing Cisco? No. We don't even know that Cisco is being killed. They just gave $10+million dollar bonus to the CEO, as we learned elsewhere in these threads. That suggests robust health.

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

#192

Post by toomuchtodo »

closeparen wrote: post #190
toomuchtodo wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That country and time no longer exist, and it’s disingenuous to make such a comparison.

Shouldn't you be a little suspicious of a finding that it stopped being appropriate to share $thing after you got yours? Of course that country still exists. We're all sitting here benefitting from it while we kick the ladder on everyone else.

I’m not suspicious. The land wasn’t shared, it was taken by force and the people it was taken from were either massacred or rounded up onto reservations where they slowly die out from poverty today. Nothing today can change what was done; that doesn’t make open borders and unlimited immigration penance for our historical wrongs.

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

#193

Post by bediger4000 »

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.

I guess I'll also point out that you've dodged the question. Chinese companies are not a good example - the Chinese government interferes in markets to a degree unheard of elsewhere. That's a different regulatory environment altogether than what you have imagined as being competitive.

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

#194

Post by Aloha »

rhexs wrote: post #185
Aloha wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without illegal immigrants crops would literally rot in the fields. I don't like illegal immigration, I'd rather there be a easy legal program to allow temporary workers, but there isn't, and I like eating.

Just to be clear, you believe you would starve if immigration policy was changed in such a way that farmers received less subsidies and had to pay a fair wage to get work done?

No actually. I believe that just deporting the illegal immigrants without fixing the other broken parts of the system that we would have massive crop losses - significant amounts of fresh fruit and vegetables would disappear from shelves.

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

#195

Post by closeparen »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #192
closeparen wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't you be a little suspicious of a finding that it stopped being appropriate to share $thing after you got yours? Of course that country still exists. We're all sitting here benefitting from it while we kick the ladder on everyone else.

I’m not suspicious. The land wasn’t shared, it was taken by force and the people it was taken from were either massacred or rounded up onto reservations where they slowly die out from poverty today. Nothing today can change what was done; that doesn’t make open borders and unlimited immigration penance for our historical wrongs.

>Being selective about who a country allows in as a resident or citizen isn’t immoral.

Maybe not, if the selection process were primarily concerned with individual merit. But it isn't. We decide which races to allow as residents or citizens, then throw the individuals into a lottery, with good odds for white countries and bad odds for brown ones. Discriminating on ancestry or proxies for ancestry (like nationality) to keep underprivileged groups down and privileged groups comfortable is immoral. So is denying others the same opportunities benefitted from merely because they came later.

Would your own family tree's entrypoints to the US pass your test?

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

#196

Post by remarkEon »

baddox wrote: post #188
remarkEon wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don’t understand the “skin in the game” argument at all. How is it worse for a citizen than a non-citizen if the social fabric of the state breaks down? Besides, this seems like a bizarre argument for why citizens should have “first dibs” at jobs. What does that have anything to do with a doomsday scenario? As for the necessity of making distinctions regarding obligations to the state, how is that relevant, particu…

>I don’t understand the “skin in the game” argument at all. How is it worse for a citizen than a non-citizen if the social fabric of the state breaks down?

Because the "inhabitants" can just go home, while the Citizens are stuck here - this is their home.

>Besides, this seems like a bizarre argument for why citizens should have “first dibs” at jobs.

This is literally what a sovereign government is supposed to do: provide for and prioritize the needs of it's citizens. If your contention is that anyone should be able to come here and be afforded the same protections we'll just keep talking past each other (which I think we already are). It sounds like, by extension and since you don't consider "Citizen" a meaningful distinction, that "inhabitants" should have the same voting rights as Citizens. This is a recipe for chaos.

>I just see no good reason for a government to prioritize citizens above non-citizen inhabitants, especially for job availability.

Then you've missed a lot of reading on what the entire purpose of Government even is.

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

#197

Post by baddox »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #165
baddox wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no inherent problem with the concept of citizenship, I just point out that it is arbitrary, and more importantly, I don’t think it should be the threshold for the people the government should be expected to protect or support.

It is arbitrary, because you have to draw the line somewhere .

How about people who are not violent criminals and don’t have contagious diseases? That is far less arbitrary.

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

#198

Post by remarkEon »

closeparen wrote: post #154
remarkEon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And people who are living and working in America are American, they may just not be citizens. Since when? I have literally never heard this. This is a patently absurd claim to make. Just because someone lives here does not mean they are "American", unless you think that all of the inputs to national identity are vapid, meaningless attributes that are completely transferable. >We're talking about work visas, which me…

It's true that accepting immigrants into the tribe is historically unusual, but that's why it's a distinctive and important feature of American national identity.

I think you should go back and review some of that history. Integration into the "American tribe" has been bumpy at best and downright violent at worst. It's often taken actual war to make it happen. The Draft Riots come to mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots

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

#199

Post by duxup »

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…

If the worker visa system is supposed to bring in critical workers we don't have.... then just set a nice high price / minimum salary.

If they're that critical companies should pay a premium. If not, I guess it's not that big a deal.

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

#200

Post by nortonace »

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 love all this talk of illegal's these days /s.
Post reply on HN