[deleted]
Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
11–20 of 95 posts
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#12[flagged]
If I'm concerned with the overall citizen population's job prospects, the relative size of the increases matters more to me than the absolute change. If I created 1 nepotistic software job for my kid and 3 jobs for software professionals not related to me, I think very few people would look at that and say "Oh, well three times as many non-nepotistic jobs were created, so we can ignore the one..."
How are H-1Bs comparable to nepotism?
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#13Does it apply to people who planned to start on Oct 1, 2025? With the current system, you must apply in April if you succeed in the lottery, and then you can start in a few months in October, once per year. Looks very uncomfortable for those who were about to relocate.
Looks like it:
a) Pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000 — subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (c) of this section. This restriction shall expire, absent extension, 12 months after the effective date of this proclamation, which shall be 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025.
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#14They do well explaining how H-1b is broken - but adding a $100k petition fee only breaks it worse. A real fix would be fantastic.
[deleted]
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I'm concerned with the overall citizen population's job prospects, the relative size of the increases matters more to me than the absolute change. If I created 1 nepotistic software job for my kid and 3 jobs for software professionals not related to me, I think very few people would look at that and say "Oh, well three times as many non-nepotistic jobs were created, so we can ignore the one..."
How are H-1Bs comparable to nepotism?
Don't focus on the nepotism aspect specifically, but rather that job group in one distinct, identifiable population (my kid or H1Bs) grew at a far higher rate than for the general (not my kids or not H1Bs) employment market, despite the latter experiencing more absolute growth.
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#16[deleted]
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#17Bsky thread which reported a bunch of details I didn't see in other outlets https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3l...
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#18They do well explaining how H-1b is broken - but adding a $100k petition fee only breaks it worse. A real fix would be fantastic.
Why does it break it worse?
This does nothing to stop the rise of GCCs.
In tech industry, we already began slowing down H1B hiring after COVID, and remote work only exacerbated that trend (I can't justify spending $150k plus an additional 25-35% in withholdings, medical, and benefits when I can hire 2-3 people with a similar outlay in Praha or Bangalore or Tel Aviv).
At least with H1B hiring, there was some incentive for industries like cybersecurity to keep some engineering headcount in the US. Now I have no reason not to completely offshore to Tel Aviv or Praha becuase the talent is there and not in the US.
This H1B change does nothing to solve the pipeline crisis nor does it solve offshoring (though even with a services tax, I'd be hard pressed to find the same ecosystem in the US like I can in Israel or Poland or even India for significant swaths of cybersecurity).
Finally, charging $100k per year per H1B employee means I can now justify a $1-10M investment in building a GCC abroad in CEE or India and availing tax benefits, subsidies, and tax holidays.
All this did is now incentivize me to push my portfolio companies to move hiring almost entirely abroad and choose a couple of high level PMs and EMs on H1Bs who would be open to becoming a Director of PM or Director of Engineering at a GCC abroad.
On top of that, the cream of the crop you want with a brain drain like academics in STEM fields, nurses, and doctors are sponsored on H1Bs.
America has a pipeline and skills problem in a lot of STEM fields and subfields, and coding bootcamp grads aren't going to cut it.
Cutting down on processing abuse by consultancies is something everyone can get behind, but this is literally the stupidest way to approach that problem.
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I'm concerned with the overall citizen population's job prospects, the relative size of the increases matters more to me than the absolute change. If I created 1 nepotistic software job for my kid and 3 jobs for software professionals not related to me, I think very few people would look at that and say "Oh, well three times as many non-nepotistic jobs were created, so we can ignore the one..."
How are H-1Bs comparable to nepotism?
Maybe because nepotism leads to untalented people getting jobs?
I think the $100K fee is a good idea. If these H-1Bs are exceptional talent, paying $100k to employ one is truly a bargain.
Re: Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers
#20If the cost benefit analysis for employers still shows that H1-Bs are cheaper, how will this offset H1-B exploitation? My guess is that this will suppress STEM wages artificially to account for paying a one-time fee for an H1-B, but hiring someone for 1+ years at that suppressed rate will be cheaper. Employers will blame AI for decrease in STEM wages, of course. A complementary solution is to add the $100k fee, and to restrict H1-B per employer per year, or something like that.