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

H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 235 posts

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#101

Post by jogjayr »

akshat_h wrote: post #45
m0zg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only have to do that if your new job is significantly different than your existing one. You do have to notify the government (USCIS probably) that you're changing jobs, bu that's not "visa application process again" if your new job is similar, and you're unlikely to be denied. Job changes are very dangerous for H1-Bs in other ways and employers know it (and abuse it, nearly all of them). Basically if your employe…

and you'll have to GTFO the US within (IIRC) 2 weeks. I think there was a grace period of 60 days introduced in 2017 though I am not sure on the status of it now.

It's a one-time grace period, not 60 days cumulative over a lifetime. The second time you get laid off without a new job in hand no grace period for you.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#102

Post by [deleted] »

abc_lisper wrote: post #92
tbyehl wrote: post #90

Why should anyone sympathize with someone who came here on what was supposed to be a non-immigrant visa tied to a particular job and then changes their mind about immigrating / the job? The whole immigration system sucks, and especially H1-B, but let's not pretend only some of the players are gaming it. Everyone is.

H-1B is dual-intent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_intent

[deleted]

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#103

Post by [deleted] »

abc_lisper wrote: post #92
tbyehl wrote: post #90

Why should anyone sympathize with someone who came here on what was supposed to be a non-immigrant visa tied to a particular job and then changes their mind about immigrating / the job? The whole immigration system sucks, and especially H1-B, but let's not pretend only some of the players are gaming it. Everyone is.

H-1B is dual-intent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_intent

[deleted]

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#104

Post by nraynaud »

tbyehl wrote: post #90

Why should anyone sympathize with someone who came here on what was supposed to be a non-immigrant visa tied to a particular job and then changes their mind about immigrating / the job? The whole immigration system sucks, and especially H1-B, but let's not pretend only some of the players are gaming it. Everyone is.

There is no immigrant visa for work as far as I know. There is no immigrant visa even to get married.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#105

Post by tbyehl »

abc_lisper wrote: post #92
tbyehl wrote: post #90

Why should anyone sympathize with someone who came here on what was supposed to be a non-immigrant visa tied to a particular job and then changes their mind about immigrating / the job? The whole immigration system sucks, and especially H1-B, but let's not pretend only some of the players are gaming it. Everyone is.

H-1B is dual-intent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_intent

It became dual-intent, which lead to everyone's intent becoming to immigrate, which has lead to incredibly long processing times...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1990

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#106

Post by president »

conanbatt wrote: post #91

Im amazed at the level of protectionism expressed in this thread, in this community. I will make an argument for the cynics that believe they should be protected from competition: that immigration restrictions and caps like the H1B curtail the freedom of Americans to buy services from who they want to. American people that run American businesses are prohibited from hiring people they believe to be best suited for th…

> I will make an argument for the cynics that believe they should be protected from competition: that immigration restrictions and caps like the H1B curtail the freedom of Americans to buy services from who they want to. American people that run American businesses are prohibited from hiring people they believe to be best suited for the job.

This argument makes sense from the point of a business owner but not necessarily for the average American who will lose his job to a foreign worker that will work ungodly hours for considerably less pay. And over time, working ungodly hours will then become the norm and get worse and worse over time as the cycle continues. But yes, there is plenty of money to made if you're a business owner who can hire plenty of cheap and willing workers.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#107

Post by roywiggins »

kmonsen wrote: post #62
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all tech workers are created equal and not all companies need tech rock stars. Joe's Tech Corp would be priced out of the H1B market but could still compete for talent in the citizen pool. Different talent levels come with different compensation requirements. I'm trying to come up with the most charitable interpretation of your last sentence but am failing. Was it meant as a "let them eat cake" statement for not…

Money is how we as a society have chosen to decide how resources are allocated. Why would we decide to be 'socialist' here and say use a lottery or some other stupid way? I'm totally amazed how often the US come up with ways for the rich to have the benefits of socialism and the or to have the consequences of capitalism.

> Why would we decide to be 'socialist' here and say use a lottery or some other stupid way?

we already run an immigration lottery

https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/diversity-visa

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#108

Post by PeterisP »

nerdponx wrote: post #17
ergothus wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a baseline, I'm in favor of a lot of immigration and think people have way too many hoops to jump through in general, but the H1B crowd in particular is a group that matches even what most of those opposed to mass immigration claim to desire in immigrants. That said, i've noticed different "worlds" of H1B worlds, with different impacts upon other workers. I did a govt job on the US East Coast (Richmond, VA) that h…

I don't even understand the point of H-1B being tied to a specific employer or job title.

The declared intended purpose of H-1B is not for the benefit of the worker but for the benefit of US economy - the visa is intended so that the US employer can fill that particular job position that requires special skills.

If that position ceases to exist or gets filled by a local worker, then the visa loses its purpose, the employee apparently isn't needed anymore by US and can be discarded.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#109

Post by neetdeth »

throwaway082729 wrote: post #22
jimbob45 wrote: post #13

It's tough to convince America that you need to import immigrants because there isn't a single American that can possibly fill the job. Some candidate (cough) is going to bring that up in the next election and I'm not sure I've seen a legitimate argument against it that isn't a generalization.

You mean single, unemployed, qualified American who really wants that job. There are probably thousands of Americans that can take up that job but don't want to because they don't want to move or like their current job or don't like that company, etc.

Or they can't take up that job because they don't have the credentials because they didn't pursue education in the field because education in America is expensive, and there is no market incentive to do so because everyone knows that the positions that do exist are quickly filled with low-to-median wage hires with overseas credentials, which is circularly justified by a perennial shortage of qualified American candidates, somehow, despite a population of 330M.

Even in legitimate cases of difficult to find specialty labor, programs like H-1B should be sparingly applied because they jam the market signaling mechanisms that create qualified candidates in the first place.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#110

Post by jogjayr »

yazan94 wrote: post #47
trustfundbaby wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple solution is to give every h1b worker a temporary green card or somehow allow them free mobility of work within the United states. Being allowed to move jobs at will, vs being beholden to the hiring companies for sponsorship, will quickly kill these body shops and also let us know if tech firms really are being honest about a shortage of skilled engineers.

I don't think this solution makes sense. I agree that , from an ethical standpoint, there should to be better protections for H1B holders. But giving everyone free reign to change jobs is also ripe for abusing the system and possibly flooding the market without a general way to gauge need for that particular H1B applicant's skillset. Currently, the process is that you need to find a company that is willing to sponsor…

> the company just ate the paperwork legal costs and the role they hired for might not even stay filled for long,

Would you expect a company to be able to retain US citizen employees if it underpaid or gave boring work?

Switching jobs is a stressful, non-trivial process. Most people who are happy with their job don't want to change it. If the company can't retain an employee on the merits of its own offerings and compensation, that's too bad.

Post reply on HN