151–160 of 254 posts
The title + "Just one month later, Pichai’s firm filed applications for low-paid foreign workers to come to America and take highly specialized tech jobs." almost suggest that the company is firing high-pay American citizens to bring in low-pay immigrants, and the post doesn't mention anywhere that most of the layoffs were probably immigrants to begin with anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not the requirement. It's frustrating to see otherwise smart people on every single tech board ever since decades to not understand work visa and employment green card requirements and the difference between them.
That is the requirement. The law applies standards to ensure that domestic workers aren't adversely impacted by the hiring of foreign workers. This includes putting essentially bogus ads in newspaper classifieds, and requires that they're paying the same to H1-B workers in the same role as a domestic worker, among other comical things. The program has defacto evolved to one in which the US can tap into a skilled glob…
> Like many here, I've written a few H1-B role requisition documents - which are often designed to be so ludicrously specific that it would be almost impossible to find anyone to fill that role, save for the one person applying for the visa
Both of these things have absolutely nothing to do with H1B visa requirements. You're just proving my point in the comment you're replying to. Please read it again.
Also read your own references to see where they require ads in newspapers or needing to tailor H1B "requisition documents". Spoiler, there's none.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visas always are bad for citizen workers, full stop. They are always competition blunting the labor market. It is always good to be labor in a labor constrained market, and the lower supply, the better. I don't see how any liberalization could help local workers in the short term (I assume liberalization means expansion in this context).
It's really doubtful whether a labor constrained labor market helps _all_ local workers. Sure, some may see a benefit. Others might see employers cancel projects and reduce planned investments, due to more expensive inputs driven by higher labor costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s a perfectly logical (if not humane given current immigration law) position to hold that companies should be required to lay off visa holders first and for there to be a “cooling off” period between layoffs and hiring of visa holders. This is really suboptimal though, what if you have a H1B worker that's a high performer in a key position that would make your company collapse if they left but say, they were bor…
> what if you have a H1B worker that's a high performer in a key position that would make your company collapse if they left Provide an option for a company to submit some paperwork and pay some non-trivial fee (to avoid gaming) that allows them to exempt such an employee from the visa-first layoff requirement. Additionally, fast track the green card process for whom said exemption is granted.
This could easily be done by not having a per-country quota for green cards that seriously sanctions H1B holders from India and China. As in:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/migrate/democrats-i...
Republicans probably won't let it happen, however.
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.
A'int gonna end up being authors or technical writers for sure but it doesn't get in the way of actually communicating.
There are multiple missing things for this: 1. Layoffs happened regardless of visa status, so visa workers were part of the layoffs. 2. The visa applications for H1B could be for workers already working in the company under a different visa like TN or F1 3. The positions affected by layoffs and positions filing for H1B could be different. For example, a front end position may be affected by layoffs, but the visa appl…
I don’t necessarily believe this position but not a single one of your points argues against the theory that H1b visas are bad for green card/citizen holders during times of layoffs. It’s a perfectly logical (if not humane given current immigration law) position to hold that companies should be required to lay off visa holders first and for there to be a “cooling off” period between layoffs and hiring of visa holders…
Depends what you mean by "logical". Blindly preferring citizens over visa holders is bad for the company, bad for the visa holders, and bad for the economy in the long term, but it's good for the citizen workers in the short term. I guess logic is defined by your priorities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is the requirement. The law applies standards to ensure that domestic workers aren't adversely impacted by the hiring of foreign workers. This includes putting essentially bogus ads in newspaper classifieds, and requires that they're paying the same to H1-B workers in the same role as a domestic worker, among other comical things. The program has defacto evolved to one in which the US can tap into a skilled glob…
> This includes putting essentially bogus ads in newspaper classifieds > Like many here, I've written a few H1-B role requisition documents - which are often designed to be so ludicrously specific that it would be almost impossible to find anyone to fill that role, save for the one person applying for the visa Both of these things have absolutely nothing to do with H1B visa requirements. You're just proving my point…
If you respond to incorrect information with correct information and show us how it is correct, your comments will be more persuasive as well as more in the intended spirit of the site (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
It can be easy to take this for granted when you already have the correct information mapped out in your head many times over—but the rest of us don't have access to that!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visas always are bad for citizen workers, full stop. They are always competition blunting the labor market. It is always good to be labor in a labor constrained market, and the lower supply, the better. I don't see how any liberalization could help local workers in the short term (I assume liberalization means expansion in this context).
By that logic babies are bad for workers, they grow up and take their jobs! Except that is obviously ridiculous, because people on visas induce their own demand in the local economy, growing the pie for everyone. They are also pre-trained, commit crime at a level vastly below the citizen population, don't get any sort of welfare, and pay enormous amounts of taxes.
As a minor note to babies comment, a baby isn't going to reduce the salary of the delivering nurse the day it comes out of the womb. If you let a million trained nurses enter the country, that would be a different story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s actually made substantially worse by the fact that every jurisdiction that you “hire” a remote worker in is another jurisdiction whose laws you have to comply with. An American contractor suing an American company in a Californian court is at least a risk their legal department should know how to manage. An Australian contractor suing an American company in an Australian court, followed up by an Australian labor…
> An Australian contractor suing an American company in an Australian court, followed up by an Australian labor authority taking action against them for say not paying proper sick leave entitlements Does "contractor" mean something different to you than it does to everyone else? This would be like me buying an iPhone and then Apple suing me for not paying proper sick leave entitlements.
The nature of the relationship, and the work you are doing determines whether your employer is a regular employer and what taxes they have to pay. In Canada, for example, certain taxes (GST) are applied to the contractor relationship based on whether the product the company sells is available within the country, and the distinction between contractor and employee is much less fuzzy than it is in the US (if you have to ask, the person is almost certainly an employee).
It gets complicated quick