Live data from Hacker News

Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

leefang.com

231–240 of 254 posts

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really talk both about H1Bs and naturalized citizens at the same time here. The topic of conversation is worker visas. And, conveniently for you, it takes fucking forever for an Indian citizen in the US on H1B to get naturalized. But I'll ask you: do you think that naturalized citizens of south asian descent should leave the country? You and I disagree politically, why can't I demand that you expatriate?

> You can't really talk both about H1Bs and naturalized citizens at the same time here. They are closely related. American law sees the H1B as a temporary worker visa, which in theory won’t lead to lots of new naturalized citizens changing the country and the workforce. Indians see the H1B as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. The ridiculousness of the H1B process arises from that fundamental…

> They are closely related. American law sees the H1B as a temporary worker visa, which in theory won’t lead to lots of new naturalized citizens changing the country and the workforce. Indians see the H-1B as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization.

Not exactly. It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization.

The common dual-intent visas are: H-1B, H-4, L-1A, L-1B, O-1, O-3, K-1 to K-4 and V.

The alternative is a non-intent visa (B-1/B-2, TN, H-2A, H-2B, E-1 to E-3, F-1, J-1, M-1) which becomes invalid as soon as you demonstrate immigrant intent (for instance by filing an I-485 adjustment of status petition).

> The ridiculousness of the H1B process arises from that fundamental conflict.

From a conflict, yes, but not from this conflict. The conflict is that neither US party is pro-immigration but USCIS is still mandated by law to offer immigrant visas. So they make it as difficult as humanly, legally possible.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't really talk both about H1Bs and naturalized citizens at the same time here. They are closely related. American law sees the H1B as a temporary worker visa, which in theory won’t lead to lots of new naturalized citizens changing the country and the workforce. Indians see the H1B as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. The ridiculousness of the H1B process arises from that fundamental…

> They are closely related. American law sees the H1B as a temporary worker visa, which in theory won’t lead to lots of new naturalized citizens changing the country and the workforce. Indians see the H-1B as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. Not exactly. It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and natural…

> It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization.

The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. The only thing the “dual entry” legislation did was to create the legal fiction, where the USCIS/CBP are not allowed to use the application for a green card as evidence of immigration intent.

Before 1990 or so, as soon as you applied for a green card while on H1B, your visa (though not status) became effectively invalid. You couldn’t leave the country, because you’d be denied entry, given your immigration intent. You couldn’t also apply for extension of H1B visa for the same reason.

Today, according to law, you are still not allowed to have immigration intent while on H1B, it’s just now applying for a green card does not constitute evidence of immigration intent (which is, of course, entirely a legal fiction).

The US immigration law and practice is completely insane. We have non-immigrant visas that, through legal fiction, are used to facilitate immigrations. At the same time, we have millions of people illegally crossing the border and making bogus asylum claims, which everyone understands to just be an immigration back door, created not through legislation, but rather discretion in enforcement. Instead of reforming the law to make it sane, and enforcing it (similar to eg. what Canada or Australia have), we have insane law, and strictly enforce it only against people who would be most valuable to have here.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#233
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be better to spend less of your comments expressing frustration with people who don't understand, and more explaining what the difference actually is. I read both of your comments and while I have no reason to disagree with you, I can't tell what you're actually saying. If you respond to incorrect information with correct information and show us how it is correct, your comments will be more persuasive as wel…

Fair, I will do that. I had just become jaded over the years(almost 15 years now) spending time explaining the same point in tech forums and then later it's just even more and more comments from others confidently stating the same wrong things again on every tech immigration related story(a bunch on this story including the couple of parent comments in this thread I was replying to). This creates a feedback loop with…

Having posted over 60k comments largely repeating the same explanations over and over, I definitely sympathize with the frustrations of internet statelessness!

Writing one definitive explanation and then linking to it sounds like a good solution in this case. Even if just you wrote it up as an HN comment and then linked to that in the future.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#234
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is precisely what the parent commenter doesn't understand. He thinks the job of a programmer is all about technical skills. In fact that is only a part of the job. You need to be able to write, speak, and communicate in fluent English to be effective. And most Indian nationals, Peruvians, Columbians, et al cannot rise to that level.

92.2% of the American-born native English speakers I work with can't write worth a damn, either.

And it is highly unlikely that aforementioned group of illiterates are applying for software engineering positions... so I'm not sure how relevant this statistic is.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#235
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are closely related. American law sees the H1B as a temporary worker visa, which in theory won’t lead to lots of new naturalized citizens changing the country and the workforce. Indians see the H-1B as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. Not exactly. It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and natural…

> It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. The only thing the “dual entry” legislati…

> The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry.

An immigrant visa to the US is a green card.

Having immigrant intent is not a barrier to admission on a dual-intent visa. H-1s do not have to demonstrate that they have a "residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning" and "the H category is specifically excluded from the I.N.A. § 214(b)'s presumption of immigrant intent;" [1]

> Before 1990 or so, as soon as you applied for a green card while on H1B, your visa (though not status) became effectively invalid. You couldn’t leave the country, because you’d be denied entry, given your immigration intent. You couldn’t also apply for extension of H1B visa for the same reason.

This is exactly what happens today if you file I-485 on a non-intent status like a TN. It doesn't happen on a dual-intent status.

> Today, according to law, you are still not allowed to have immigration intent while on H1B, it’s just now applying for a green card does not constitute evidence of immigration intent (which is, of course, entirely a legal fiction).

Regulation 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(16)(i) states: "The alien may legitimately come to the United States for a temporary period as an H-1C or H-1B nonimmigrant and depart voluntarily at the end of his or her authorized stay and, at the same time, lawfully seek to become a permanent resident of the United States." [1]

Also you can possess immigrant intent and even petition from non-intent status like TN, so long as you developed said intent after arrival, and once you take steps (I-485 for instance) you can’t renew. A lot of folks apply for a green card from TN status, it’s just risky since you can’t leave until advance parole and if denied you may be deported.

Applying for a green card through adjustment of status absolutely 100% counts as demonstration of immigrant intent. That is filing for I-485. Having your employer file I-140 doesn't because you didn't file it, your employer did.

This is basically all wrong.

Except for the part where you say that the US immigration system is silly - it is - and the part where you say that a system more like Canada and Australia would help - it would.

[1] https://isss.temple.edu/international/h-1b-temporary-employe...

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#236
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. The only thing the “dual entry” legislati…

> The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. An immigrant visa to the US is a green card. Having immigrant intent is not a barrier to admission on a dual-intent visa. H-1s do not have to demonstrate that they have a "residence in a f…

The USCIS doesn’t make the law, Congress does. Its regulations are interpretations (and workarounds) of the statute. The statute is clear that H1B is a non-immigrant, temporary worker visa. “Dual intent” appears nowhere in the statute. It’s a legal fiction created by the regulation that’s necessary precisely because the statute requires non-immigrant intent. It doesn’t mean that the H1B visa allows either non-immigrant and immigrant intent. It means that you have both at the same time—the immigrant intent from filing for a green card, and the non-immigrant intent required by the H1B visa.

The reason for all this is that the 1952 INA promised the American people that it would not change America’s demographic makeup. Nobody can get the votes to change that in Congress. But the executive branch can change the regulations unilaterally.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#237
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's considered a dual-intent visa by USCIS which means that the USCIS also sees it as the first step to permanent immigration and naturalization. The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. The only thing the “dual entry” legislati…

> The way the “dual intent” thing works is not by making it a non-temporary, or immigrant visa. It is still a temporary, non-immigrant visa, and the law still says that having immigration intent still is grounds for refusing entry. An immigrant visa to the US is a green card. Having immigrant intent is not a barrier to admission on a dual-intent visa. H-1s do not have to demonstrate that they have a "residence in a f…

> Having immigrant intent is not a barrier to admission on a dual-intent visa. H-1s do not have to demonstrate that they have a "residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning" and "the H category is specifically excluded from the I.N.A. § 214(b)'s presumption of immigrant intent;" [1]

You are missing the point. Yes, H1Bs are excluded from presumption of immigrant intent. This doesn't mean that they can have immigrant intent. Instead, the law says (reiterating what I said in my previous comment) that "the fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 of this title or has otherwise sought permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (c), (L), or (V) of section 1101(a)(15) of this title or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such subparagraph". Of course, in practice, since the government has few other means of proving immigrant intent, and since they cannot presume immigrant intent, this means that the obvious immigrant intent exhibited by applying for permanent residence must be ignored. This is why the CFR says that, because this is true in practical application of the law. My point is that it is true thanks to legal fiction, where the government is obligated to ignore the obvious evidence of immigrant intent, notwithstanding legislation otherwise demanding lack of immigrant intent.

> Also you can possess immigrant intent and even petition from non-intent status like TN, so long as you developed said intent after arrival, and once you take steps (I-485 for instance) you can’t renew.

Yes, I talk about this in my comment, let me helpfully quote it, in case you missed it:

> Before 1990 or so, as soon as you applied for a green card while on H1B, your visa (though not status) became effectively invalid. You couldn’t leave the country, because you’d be denied entry, given your immigration intent. You couldn’t also apply for extension of H1B visa for the same reason.

Observe that I explicitly say that this doesn't invalidate your status, only (effectively) your visa.

> Having your employer file I-140 doesn't because you didn't file it, your employer did.

This is incorrect, otherwise the legislation wouldn't need to say that "the fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 (...) shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence".

> This is basically all wrong.

Nothing I said is wrong, and nothing what you said has contradicted what I said (except where you were wrong). You are just talking past me: I acknowledge the practical reality of the consequences of the legislation and the ensuing CFR regulations (indeed, I am myself a beneficiary of the process, starting from a dual-intent L-1 visa). Instead, my point is that the law, instead of saying that "yes, it's totally kosher for for H1B holders to come here with immigrant intent", it schizophrenically says something like "no, you cannot have immigration intent on H1B, but unlike on, say, B1, you don't have to prove that you don't, and we will just pretend that your immigrant petition does not in any way show that you have an immigration intent (which, to reiterate, you shall not have)".

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US requires foreign labour to function. Which is why neither the Repubs or Democrats have ever been even remotely serious about tackling migration.

>> The US requires foreign labour to function. Maybe at the service/entry level but certainly not for tech jobs. Tech visas have nothing to do with filling the millions of service jobs; they're about filling the corporations' pockets with millions.

The argument doesn't work for service jobs either. Salaries in these jobs would rise without a source of cheap labor and domestic labor would fill it.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked that long in another country, as an American, and had kids there. Then I was laid off. The government didn’t care, my employer didn’t care, I had to leave and uproot everything. This is how it works in most of the world. Only in America do we think an immigrant “deserves” a job while letting native born citizens go hungry.

You do realize that basically 90+% of Americans today are all immigrants right? You do realize that right? Essentially you are stating everyone who loses a job in the U.S. should leave the US. Or alternatively you want to draw a line when the good immigrants are allowed to enter after which are the bad immigrants. And I’m sure that conveniently that line will ensure your family becomes part of the good immigrants.

This is not true. If your parents were immigrants and you were born here you are not an immigrant.

Re: Big Tech Resumed Hiring Foreign Workers Just Weeks After Layoffs

#240
post #223
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe instead of killing "work visa programs" we can kill "low wages" for foreign workers?

Here is a better solution: the countries foreign workers are coming from should do a better job of retaining them. When countries lose their talent, they are brain-drained and this stunts the growth of their own tech-sectors. Ideally, foreign workers won't want to leave their own countries because they should have high-wages and good opportunities at home.

So, to solve working immigration issue one country should somehow force foreign countries to retain outside immigration by proposing better job to workers?

How one country can do it?

Post reply on HN