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

U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

computerworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 129 posts

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#111

Post by bodyfour »

pandaman wrote: post #108
bodyfour wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The non-H1B salaries aren't public, but they do get audited. Employers need to be able to demonstrate that they're not paying H1Bs less, or there is hell to pay. These audits aren't rare either -- by the time you're large enough to have decent number of H1Bs they're practically routine. Large companies have a team of people just focusing on H1B compliance. As you discovered, there is a hidden wage pressure anyway. Ov…

>Employers need to be able to demonstrate that they're not paying H1Bs less, or there is hell to pay Any source for this? I have never heard of such requirements (as well, as often cited need to prove that no citizens available for each H1B position). All you need is to pay above the prevailing wage. Which is ridiculously low anyways. >The dumb thing is that the solution is absurdly simple: just allow H1Bs to transfe…

I can't claim your experience since I've never been on your side of the H1B process. I've also been out of people-management for a few years. I can say that when I was in that position it was drilled into me that you need to make sure H1's get equal pay.

Just googling a bit now about H1B audits I found this: http://www.raminenilaw.com/h-1b-wage-and-hour-audits-dol-aud... They mention that the auditors can demand 3 years of wage data for both H1B and non-H1B's in the same employment classification.

Further, see http://www.greencardapply.com/h1b/h1b_pwages.htm#sthash.DNRi...

"in certain programs, such as H-1B (temporary specialty occupations), the employer is required to pay the prevailing wage or the actual wage paid by the employer to workers with similar skills and qualifications, whichever is higher"

I'm sure there are places that skate as close to the line as they can and do try to save money on H1Bs. However, the law is set up to avoid this and audits are much more frequent than a decade ago.

> Another issue is that H1B has maximum term of 6 years

My understanding -- and correct me if I'm wrong about this -- is that transferring early on isn't a big problem. If your GC isn't far along anyway then a job switch can't cause much of a delay. However, if your GC seems just around the corner (a limbo that can take years to get through) you're unlikely to risk moving jobs and throwing a wrench into the works.

I can understand that the H1B process would want an employer to demonstrate that they're not bringing someone over to flood an already over-supplied local labor market. However, once an immigrant's first employer does that I don't see any reason to restrict them further. As far as I'm concerned, they've earned their visa and they should feel free to work anywhere they like. The entire concept of a human being having to be "sponsored" by a company is distasteful.

Further, what possible reason could there be for a 6 year limit? If they were suitable for employment in 2008, they should still be in 2014 given that they have more experience. It's insane that we'd even threaten sending them away. It would be simpler to just start the GC process automatically with their H1B.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#112

Post by icebraining »

crdoconnor wrote: post #105
cynicalkane wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surveys consistently find academic economists to average left-wing. I had thought economics degrees were also the highest-paying (at 75k if I remember correctly) but apparently this has been outstripped by a few engineering disciplines, particularly petroleum, in the last few years. I edited my post. However, having an economics degree is still a good way to make money and academia not a good way to make money. The p…

>The point is people stereotype research economists as corporate shills or something, when they tend to be left-wing They tend to poll Democrat more than Republican, but that certainly doesn't mean that they're left wing or anti-corporate. Quite the opposite in fact. There is a near unanimity on the benefits of CAFTA, NAFTA and immigration, for instance. Also against government ownership of enterprise. http://econfac…

There's nothing inherently right-wing about being pro-immigration or against State ownership of enterprise (or against the State in general, in fact).

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#113

Post by pandaman »

bodyfour wrote: post #111
pandaman wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Employers need to be able to demonstrate that they're not paying H1Bs less, or there is hell to pay Any source for this? I have never heard of such requirements (as well, as often cited need to prove that no citizens available for each H1B position). All you need is to pay above the prevailing wage. Which is ridiculously low anyways. >The dumb thing is that the solution is absurdly simple: just allow H1Bs to transfe…

I can't claim your experience since I've never been on your side of the H1B process. I've also been out of people-management for a few years. I can say that when I was in that position it was drilled into me that you need to make sure H1's get equal pay. Just googling a bit now about H1B audits I found this: http://www.raminenilaw.com/h-1b-wage-and-hour-audits-dol-aud... They mention that the auditors can demand 3 ye…

The audit in the first link looks like an audit of the claimed wages (on the LCA petition you submit when requesting an H1B) are same as the factual ones. I've also heard about the "ability to pay" auditing (the company has to have enough profit to support the claimed wage) and working on site (to bust body shops that sell H1Bs to another company). These are all irrelevant to companies such as Microsoft or Amazon (they are not benching their H1Bs, don't ship them off-site and pay way above prevailing wage).

The LCA itself contains a promise that the wage is "average" for the employer. It is not the maximum so even if it had been enforced it would be absurd to claim that H1Bs are paid no less than citizens based on this alone.

>However, if your GC seems just around the corner (a limbo that can take years to get through) you're unlikely to risk moving jobs and throwing a wrench into the works.

It might be so in some cases. It's not related to H1B. H1B is a temporary worker's non-immigrant visa. Green Card is an immigrant visa. They are entirely orthogonal and you can get a GC without H1B and vice versa.

>Further, what possible reason could there be for a 6 year limit?

It's a temporary visa so it has to have a term. For permanent immigration there is the EBGC.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#114

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

sdenton4 wrote: post #69
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a computing specialist who makes a very generous income from a large US employer, I am an expert in a specific technology. I've also been in the position of trying to hire developers with similar skill sets. As a result, I might bring a slightly different perspective. I am a US citizen. As you point out, I don't need to dress "business casual" and I can (and do) work remotely, and the pay is good. But in some spec…

There's far less emphasis on in-house training for specific skills than there once was. My mother, for anecdata, came out of a computer science program in the mid eighties with her education financed by her employer. Companies today don't see employees as long-term investments, and that's one of the prime reasons for the lack of people with the specific skills that those companies need. Highly specific skill sets are…

>Companies today don't see employees as long-term investments, and that's one of the prime reasons for the lack of people with the specific skills that those companies need.

I've personally interviewed multiple dozens of graduates from top-notch computer science programs. Of those I've had the opportunity to interview, only a very small percentage (1-2%, give or take?) seem to even have the right aptitude to learn the more advanced skills.

Sure if you're hiring for web development you can train anyone with even mild programming aptitude on your stack in a month or two. But there are quantum levels of aptitude: If you just hiring someone because they're competent in one task with the intent to "train them" on another, there's no guarantee that you'll hit that 1-2% who can hack it.

It's far safer to find someone who has (at a minimum!) proven they can do something of similar complexity. And guess what? The kinds of skills I'm talking about can be self-taught (that's where I got them!), so it's the potential employees who need to take their future into their own hands and just learn the niche skills that interest them. (Or better, the ones in high demand.)

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#115

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

esrauch wrote: post #100
humanrebar wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hear stories of developers making $500k+ per year, or getting job offers worth millions. At that level, then yes, I think we could stand to see a bit of downward pressure on salaries. Why? If some developer jobs are as hard as brain surgery, why shouldn't those developers be paid as much as brain surgeons? Not capping wages also encourages employers to rethink their employment strategies. Maybe that sort of emplo…

> why shouldn't those developers be paid as much as brain surgeons? Do they actually make that much? Should they get paid that much if they do?

A quick Google finds $439k as the average salary for a neurosurgeon. That's more than I make, but I've heard of salaries at some companies (COUGHgoogleCOUGH) going higher than that.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#116

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

Daishiman wrote: post #74
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a computing specialist who makes a very generous income from a large US employer, I am an expert in a specific technology. I've also been in the position of trying to hire developers with similar skill sets. As a result, I might bring a slightly different perspective. I am a US citizen. As you point out, I don't need to dress "business casual" and I can (and do) work remotely, and the pay is good. But in some spec…

> At that level, then yes, I think we could stand to see a bit of downward pressure on salaries. Why?? If you're a lawyer specializing in sovereign debt restructuring and charge $2000 an hour, we don't hear about downward salary pressure. I've never heard anyone complaining that petroleum engineers are too expensive, even if it takes them a Master's degree and an extremely costly speciality to understand their profes…

>Why??

It hurts innovation. People that good will be locked (with golden handcuffs) into large companies that can afford them.

Start-ups rarely can offer large fractions of a million dollars a year in salaries. Maybe they need to bring the entire initial development team on board as co-founders; I don't know. But right now getting good people to work with you in a start-up is harder than it ever has been before.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#117

Post by DINKDINK »

joe_the_user wrote: post #87
DINKDINK wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>H1-Bs are the very antithesis of freedom Laws restrict freedom, that's their entire point. Whether a society, political ideology etc deems those limitations in freedom necessary is a different story. Visas put a wedge in the law to allow someone to work at a business. Global immigration laws prevent people/workers from moving freely to other areas of economic opportunity. By making immigration controls more restrict…

Laws restrict freedom, that's their entire point. Whether a society, political ideology etc deems those limitations in freedom necessary is a different story. I see what you did there... which is, you jumped from the particular restrictions of the H1-B visa to the generality of "laws". The point the parent ultimately points to is that creating a situation where your visa ends when a particular company says it ends ma…

Indentured servitude is a system in which someone who has no present capital writes a contract with someone to exchange future labor for present capital (in an historical context, passage on ships if I recall correctly). If you're issued an H1-Bs you don't have to work at that company. Why on earth would anyone take an H1-B visa if they thought they could get a better job in their home country?

Are you saying that foreigners cannot think for themselves and that a slow, innovation-lacking, bureaucratic government is smarter and knows better than them?

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#118

Post by bodyfour »

pandaman wrote: post #113
bodyfour wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't claim your experience since I've never been on your side of the H1B process. I've also been out of people-management for a few years. I can say that when I was in that position it was drilled into me that you need to make sure H1's get equal pay. Just googling a bit now about H1B audits I found this: http://www.raminenilaw.com/h-1b-wage-and-hour-audits-dol-aud... They mention that the auditors can demand 3 ye…

The audit in the first link looks like an audit of the claimed wages (on the LCA petition you submit when requesting an H1B) are same as the factual ones. I've also heard about the "ability to pay" auditing (the company has to have enough profit to support the claimed wage) and working on site (to bust body shops that sell H1Bs to another company). These are all irrelevant to companies such as Microsoft or Amazon (th…

> They are entirely orthogonal

That's true in a technical sense, but they're effectively part of the same process for many, many skilled immigrants. Come in on H1B -> Start GC process -> Use ongoing GC application to get the H1B extension -> Finally get full GC.

> It's a temporary visa so it has to have a term.

That's answering it with a tautology. My question remains: why would we want any skilled-worker visa to be temporary? If they're skilled enough today, won't they be even better qualified after six years of work experience? It just seems ridiculous.

I'm sure plenty of people would love to skip the whole H1B and go straight for an EB3 or something, but since they're capped by country it isn't really an option for many people.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#119

Post by crdoconnor »

icebraining wrote: post #112
crdoconnor wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The point is people stereotype research economists as corporate shills or something, when they tend to be left-wing They tend to poll Democrat more than Republican, but that certainly doesn't mean that they're left wing or anti-corporate. Quite the opposite in fact. There is a near unanimity on the benefits of CAFTA, NAFTA and immigration, for instance. Also against government ownership of enterprise. http://econfac…

There's nothing inherently right-wing about being pro-immigration or against State ownership of enterprise (or against the State in general, in fact).

What is right wing or left wing is a complete red herring in the context of this discussion. Both are highly subjective, ultimately rather meaningless and are subject to the issue of "shifting goalposts". What's decried is nearly communist in the US is hard-right wing for most of the rest of the world.

Pro-corporate/anti-corporate is more meaningful. And yes, it is inherently pro corporate to be pro immigration and against state ownership of enterprise. Both are incredibly pro corporate stances in fact.

Re: U.S. Senator blasts Microsoft's H-1B push as it lays off 18,000 workers

#120

Post by nemothekid »

frostmatthew wrote: post #110
nemothekid wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My mother, for anecdata, came out of a computer science program in the mid eighties with her education financed by her employer. I don't believe thats a 100% apt comparison. In the 80s, tuition at MIT, a private school, was less than 10k/yr (according to wikipedia). Considering to do the same now would cost nearly 5-6x as much, its no surprise that corporations haven't continued those programs.

> Considering to do the same now would cost nearly 5-6x as much, its no surprise that corporations haven't continued those programs. Are you suggesting corporate profits have remained flat for the last 30 years? http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP/

I don't see how corporate profits are related at all. Metaphorically, just because I get a raise, doesn't mean I'm going to start spending $100 on a loaf of bread.

In the past the cost to send someone to college was "x", and the benefit to the company for doing so was "y". The rising costs of tuition has now caused "x" to surpass "y", making that avenue uneconomical. Corporations aren't public entities and shouldn't be expected to continue programs that result in a net loss.

Post reply on HN