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

Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 188 posts

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#141

Post by bsder »

davidw wrote: post #27
diogenescynic wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, the real fix is to make the H-1B 'lottery' into an auction. Instead of accepting 65,000 H-1Bs at random--accept the 65,000 H-1Bs with the highest wages. That way we are getting the immigrants with the highest valued skills and stopping companies like Cognizant and Infosys that game the immigration system by applying for the cheapest H-1Bs possible.

What is special about the number 65,000? Absolutely nothing. It's central planning for something that doesn't require it: http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-optimal-number...

If you upgrade the H1-B's to green card after 12 months, that "65,000" number is irrelevant.

Once you remove the "indentured" part from H1-B's, we'll never hit the cap again.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#142

Post by rubikscube »

jlebar wrote: post #128
rayiner wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty ignorant article. The limiting factor for immigration is how quickly you can Americanize immigrants, not land area. As for why it's imperative to Americanize immigrants. Look at how much trouble the U.S. has had cultivating democracy in places like Iraq. Most people acknowledge that the Iraqi people aren't ready for Democracy. Do you think they would be any more ready for democracy if you moved them e…

I am deeply saddened that this borderline racism passes for civil discourse these days. :(

I am amused that you think your feelings about perceived "racism" have any place in this civil discourse.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#143

Post by crdoconnor »

DINKDINK wrote: post #72
diogenescynic wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>artificial barriers Like citizenship? Do you consider citizenship an artificial barrier? As someone who has worked at tech companies and various law firms in the Silicon Valley, I've seen this story played out several times. Hire Cognizant, TCS, Infosys, Symphony, or some other outsourcing firm and then bring in H-1Bs for an entire department. All it does is drive down wages for everyone and hurt everyone except for…

>Do you consider citizenship an artificial barrier? Actual barrier to a job: knowing how to deliver that type of service. Artificial barrier: Something arbitrary synthesized by a party not involved in an A B transaction. Such as, having your papers in order so someone doesn't throw you in jail. >All it does is drive down wages for everyone and hurt everyone except for the 1% at the top. Specious argument. What about…

>Artificial barrier: Something arbitrary synthesized by a party not involved in an AB transaction.

Yes, other than:

* Being responsible for the welfare of A and B.

* Being responsible for mediating any disputes between A and B regarding their transaction.

* Being responsible for cracking down on potential fraudulent activity between A and B.

* Providing the medium whereby A and B can discharge their debts.

The government has nothing to do with the transactions. Absolutely nothing.

>Does allowing a company from California hire someone from New York 'drive down wages hurt everyone except the top 1%"? If not why does it suddenly 'drive down wages hurt everyone except the top 1%" when you change New York to India?

Because they're capitalizing on India's relative poverty.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#144

Post by rubikscube »

davidw wrote: post #82
rayiner wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty ignorant article. The limiting factor for immigration is how quickly you can Americanize immigrants, not land area. As for why it's imperative to Americanize immigrants. Look at how much trouble the U.S. has had cultivating democracy in places like Iraq. Most people acknowledge that the Iraqi people aren't ready for Democracy. Do you think they would be any more ready for democracy if you moved them e…

> how quickly you can Americanize immigrants, not land area. Well that's an easily defined metric, isn't it... There's nothing that says you must let immigrants become citizens right away, or give them all the same privileges citizens are entitled to. For instance, it wouldn't be at all unfair to kick people out for certain classes of crime.

> There's nothing that says you must let immigrants become citizens right away [...]

There's nothing that says you must let immigrants come.

Fixed that for you.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#145

Post by bsder »

prostoalex wrote: post #121
calvinbhai wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he meant, change jobs without needing to file for an H1b transfer or any documentation. Once a high skilled immigrant is in US, instead of giving work permit to a specific employer, make it so that its a work permit, with a time limit. 3 years, immigrant can work anywhere, any number of employers. Guess how many illicit h1b employers will be interested in bringing an immigrant, if they are not guaranteed that…

The transfer documentation is not that onerous, to be honest. Allegedly it's a gatekeeper against H1 program turning into a spout for unqualified immigration where "an employer" hires you for extremely high salary, and you quit on day 2 to start an exciting career in dishwashing.

The simplest way is to convert to a green card after being employed for 12 months. Employer is responsible for all legal fees, background check fees, etc. over the course of your employment.

If you quit at day 2, the employer is still on the hook for all the fees.

It can be gamed, but if you make the fees something like 30-40K, genuine employers will simply shrug as they'll amortize that over 3-4 years. Sweatshops, however, will lose bad.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#146

Post by bsder »

whybroke wrote: post #129
geebee wrote: post #104

While I'm glad to see the NYTimes covering this issue, I am disappointed with the headline. The US takes over 1.2 million immigrants legally into the country every year. These new free and full citizens pursue educations and careers in response to their personal life interests and market signals. You know, that whole pesky freedom thing that corporations often despise in their workforce. Some enter high tech, some do…

Well said. In fact why not simply add 65000 to the net US immigration, abolish H1B and let the much praised market forces attract or repel people to those alleged unfilled jobs by rising wages.

Because immigrants have different economic value.

Adding 65,000 day laborers is very different from adding 65,000 engineers.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#147

Post by [deleted] »

DrScump wrote: post #140
DannoHung wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to say , "IT jobs are pretty easy to export". In practice, this depends on a number of factors being aligned correctly and an organization being tuned to the idea of remote work. Especially if the deliverable of the IT job in question is part of the core function of the organization.

They are absolutely easy to export. Exporting with long-term net success (in savings or quality or both) is what's difficult.

[deleted]

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#148

Post by whybroke »

DINKDINK wrote: post #3

Can anyone elucidate why having artificial barriers to employing certain types of people is beneficial? If so, why not create the same restrictions on, say, a company in California from hiring someone from New York? Or is this a guise for xenophobia?

>Or is this a guise for xenophobia?

Would you be in favor of increasing the general US immigration cap by 65000 and abolishing H1B completely? Because I would. If you are not in favor of that then perhaps there is a motive to your concern other than racial harmony.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#149

Post by davidw »

rubikscube wrote: post #144
davidw wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how quickly you can Americanize immigrants, not land area. Well that's an easily defined metric, isn't it... There's nothing that says you must let immigrants become citizens right away, or give them all the same privileges citizens are entitled to. For instance, it wouldn't be at all unfair to kick people out for certain classes of crime.

> There's nothing that says you must let immigrants become citizens right away [...] There's nothing that says you must let immigrants come. Fixed that for you.

Actually, there is: economics. You can't have a successful country and exclude everyone who wasn't smart enough to be born there. In a world of N billion people, a lot of talented people are going to be born abroad. Keep them out, and they'll concentrate in other places.

Do you realize how much of the tech world was built be people from all over? HTTP, Linux, Google, Java, C++ and so on.

Re: Lawsuits Claim Disney Colluded to Replace U.S. Workers with Immigrants

#150

Post by DrScump »

nommm-nommm wrote: post #130
protomyth wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is, it is the main reason, and the purpose of the visa. It doesn't mean that all companies use it for that purpose, despite what they say. Yes, it is the main purpose: http://www.dol.gov/whd/immigration/h1b.htm If the companies are not using it for that purpose and telling the government something different then they are committing fraud.

Law firms have openly admitted to advising businesses in this kind of fraud! http://www.post-gazette.com/business/businessnews/2007/06/21... "Our goal is clearly not to find a qualified and interested U.S. worker, and, you know, that in a sense that sounds funny, but it's what we're trying to do here. We are complying with the law, fully, but our objective is to get this person a greencard.... Certainly we are not go…

  "Our goal is clearly not to find a qualified
  and interested U.S. worker..."
This video is a smoking gun, with respect to this firm and its clients, at least. Everyone interested in the topic should watch this. (Has anybody composed a transcript?)

Note the strategy laid out starting around 3:30:

"(have US applicants go through the motions) to find a legal basis to DISQUALIFY them... in most cases, this doesn't seem to be a problem."

Post reply on HN