521–530 of 644 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government defined "prevailing wage" for a level 1 software developer in San Francisco is $74,000. Does that sound like a market rate to you? http://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?area=41884... Edit: For a "web developer" the starting number is $52,000. In San Francisco. http://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?area=41884...
Yes it does. Level 1 is mean salary for entry level, and it's for the peninsula, not just SFC.
If this guy is starved for talent couldn't he just increase what he's willing to pay and steal people from other tech companies? (There are a number of people who would be willing to jump ship for the right #s I'm sure.) This seems to be where BusinessWeek is correct. At the end of the day engineers should be getting paid more.
There are only a handful of Yann LeCuns in the world. You can't just duplicate certain technical expertise. This isn't about developer X using framework Y; this is about research level PhDs (and equivalent) that cannot continue work for a US-based company because of visa issues.
People are still people, no matter what country they're from. To restrict immigration for work means you're saying some people, through no fault of their own, deserve to earn less money by working in their own country.
Any time you say "I'd hire a local over a foreigner", you're effectively being racist. It might not be their race specifically, but their nationality, the identity of their parents, their wealth (to do their own immigration), etc. This is still discriminating based on something the person has no control over. It's still saying "people similar to me deserve more good things in life than people I can't relate to" or "people in my in-group deserve to be treated better than members of out-groups".
What if the H1B visas were not for foreigners, but for US people from other states? Would people still be making the same arguments? California companies hiring cheap midwest talent and disadvantaging the rightful locals of their jobs and high salaries. People are still people, no matter what country they're from. To restrict immigration for work means you're saying some people, through no fault of their own, deserve…
What if the H1B visas were not for foreigners, but for US people from other states? Would people still be making the same arguments? California companies hiring cheap midwest talent and disadvantaging the rightful locals of their jobs and high salaries. People are still people, no matter what country they're from. To restrict immigration for work means you're saying some people, through no fault of their own, deserve…
I don't have a problem with a company hiring foreign labor, but I do think there should be strict limitations as long as our unemployment rate is >2-3%.
Look HNers, let's be honest with each other. There's a lot of H1B's on here. You have friends overseas who you want to see succeed in the Bay Area. In my experience at many tech companies in the Bay Area, H1B Visas exist for one reason, and one reason only - to get skilled engineering/STEM labor -- and to exploit connections (primarily Indian/Pakistani) among these workers to continue to get cheap labor. It absolutel…
I agree. But that's not a bad thing. That's the market operating more efficiently. The flipside is that it absolutely, positively helps foreign labor. Or alternatively, the overabundance of US citizens absolutely, positively hurts each other's labor.
What makes naturalized citizens so privileged? Surely they themselves are 2nd class citizens to native born Americans, who are in turn less deserving than descendants of actual American Indians. Drawing the line between "naturalized citizen" and "H1B visa holder" is quite arbitrary. It's still discrimination akin to racism or sexism.
Relevant quotes from recently posted article on Pavel Durov:
"Me myself, I’m not a big fan of the idea of countries"
"I consider myself a legal citizen of the world."
Do the people that are so vocally against the H1B program really believe that the US tech industry would be where it is without H1B workers?
Simply put, giving US companies access to the best and the brightest from around the world has made the US the global hub for technology. Any wage suppressive influences should be weighed against the overall growth of the industry as a whole. Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook. ALL of them have been hugely impacted by foreign workers. Our industry would be much much smaller than what it is without the H1B program. As a tech worker, your take is of a MUCH MUCH larger pie because of the ability to hire the best in the world in one place.
To the extent that there are companies out there that exploit the H1B program to hire indentured "slave" labor. We should be directing our criticism at those bad apples. Discuss ways to crack down on that, instead of channeling pseudo racist, xenophobia at non-american workers.
Also... the entire premise of "us versus them" seems ridiculous to me. Why not make the "them" be "us". You have highly educated, skilled people wanting to become tax paying and productive citizens. H1B is a road to a green card, and eventually naturalization. It's better for America to increase the population of motivated, skilled, and intelligent people. This drives the economy!
Look HNers, let's be honest with each other. There's a lot of H1B's on here. You have friends overseas who you want to see succeed in the Bay Area. In my experience at many tech companies in the Bay Area, H1B Visas exist for one reason, and one reason only - to get skilled engineering/STEM labor -- and to exploit connections (primarily Indian/Pakistani) among these workers to continue to get cheap labor. It absolutel…
Look HNers, let's be honest with each other. There's a lot of H1B's on here. You have friends overseas who you want to see succeed in the Bay Area. In my experience at many tech companies in the Bay Area, H1B Visas exist for one reason, and one reason only - to get skilled engineering/STEM labor -- and to exploit connections (primarily Indian/Pakistani) among these workers to continue to get cheap labor. It absolutel…
But for now it hurts local labor because it gives companies a pool of employees without rights (notably the right to walk away from a toxic environment without having to leave the country).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> * The government can give out N visas in an auction. Firms bid via legally-binding salary offers. The N highest salaries bid get the visas, and the government takes a small additional payroll tax as the only fee. This would be doomed to fail. Professional services firms can outbid basically everyone because they can turn around and bill that person out at 5x their salary. The visas will never adhere to the workers…
> This would be doomed to fail. Professional services firms can outbid basically everyone because they can turn around and bill that person out at 5x their salary. So what? Shouldn't the companies that can create the most value from the employee be the ones that get to hire them?