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

Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 275 posts

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#31

Post by sokoloff »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #21
jmspring wrote: post #7

I'm sure many US-based tech companies can be blamed for preferring the cheaper option ... I would think our visa process plays no small part here, further the lax compliance on what "special skillset" means in the case of H-* visas. The system allows it, why not take advantage of such.

Work visas of this type should pretty clearly provide a path to at least permanent residency, otherwise the workers are captive employees, and, in any case, highly educated skilled workers that an employer is arguing they can't replace out of resident populations seem like a population that even people that want restrictions on immigration would consider good candidates for it.

I thought an H1B is a dual-intent visa and has a documented path towards permanent residency. Does it not?

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#32

Post by danielmarkbruce »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #29
jmspring wrote: post #7

I'm sure many US-based tech companies can be blamed for preferring the cheaper option ... I would think our visa process plays no small part here, further the lax compliance on what "special skillset" means in the case of H-* visas. The system allows it, why not take advantage of such.

I find it interesting that Apple hasn't done what many other large US corporations have done and just open offices in a country like India. Then they essentially get rid of any US based employees. No H1B's needed and you're still paying pennies on the dollar for the work.

Try working with people on a 12 hr time difference. It's very difficult.. I don't believe it truly works. I don't think management at some places know it doesn't work because they aren't involved in the actual work.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#33

Post by tomohelix »

Reading into the press release, there is a distinction that probably escapes most native citizens here: they are talking about EB2 visa, not H1B. PERM certification is not the same labor certification done in H1B.

PERM is a much more rigorous and demanding process and it costs a lot more money than anything related to H1B. The reason is because it leads to a green card, not just a work permit. Often, it requires an advance degree and higher qualification than H1B too, PhDs or experienced masters. The money is paid upfront and USCIS then look into it and approves PERM on a case by case basis often taking a year or more. Then when the PERM passes, the applicant can finally get on the green card backlog and wait a few more years, or a decade if you were born in the wrong place...

This is to say the quality of applicants here is very high and Apple actually felt it was worth it to invest tens of thousands of dollars on each of them just for a green card gamble, which the employee can get then quit Apple immediately after and nothing can be done to them because they are now a permanent resident. No such thing as wage depression or abuse at this point because they are for all legal purposes, an equal to any American once they have EB2.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#34

Post by sokoloff »

pridkett wrote: post #19
justrealist wrote: post #9

This is the thing where when you want to sponsor a specific employee for an H1B you have to post notices pretending to look for American citizens instead. Every FAANG is guilty of this. Every startup is guilty of this. There is no law less adhered to in the US. Everyone posts the notice on the office fridge or the receptionist stand or runs some newspaper ad to cover the nominal letter of the law. It's completely poi…

Are you telling me all those job opportunities in the back of IEEE Spectrum where they give 1 line job descriptions and tell you to mail your resume to some anonymous post office box aren’t actual job opportunities? I can’t believe it! In other words, professional societies are complicit in this too.

I wonder if they didn’t do it, ifthe argument would be made that “look, these companies didn’t even advertise in IEEE Spectrum!” so they follow along and advertise there as well.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#35

Post by supportengineer »

clumsysmurf wrote: post #26

I worked at a company owned by some large banks. When the immigration lawyer came for a meetings roughly once per year, the place got super quiet. Everyone I worked with did basic stuff ... docker, Spring Boot, and I didn't understand how such basic positions needed visas in such a large metro like Phoenix. Yet, the pay was comparable ... there must be some angle I don't understand.

"You will obey your manager or you will be deported" is very powerful.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#36

Post by koolba »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #21
jmspring wrote: post #7

I'm sure many US-based tech companies can be blamed for preferring the cheaper option ... I would think our visa process plays no small part here, further the lax compliance on what "special skillset" means in the case of H-* visas. The system allows it, why not take advantage of such.

Work visas of this type should pretty clearly provide a path to at least permanent residency, otherwise the workers are captive employees, and, in any case, highly educated skilled workers that an employer is arguing they can't replace out of resident populations seem like a population that even people that want restrictions on immigration would consider good candidates for it.

H1B should be an annual auction so that the fair market value is captured by the country as a whole. Existing employers should be required to pay the latest market price to maintain their visas.

That would boost wages for all other workers and discriminatorily raise costs against orgs that do not want to “hire American”.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#37

Post by davidw »

koolba wrote: post #36
BobaFloutist wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Work visas of this type should pretty clearly provide a path to at least permanent residency, otherwise the workers are captive employees, and, in any case, highly educated skilled workers that an employer is arguing they can't replace out of resident populations seem like a population that even people that want restrictions on immigration would consider good candidates for it.

H1B should be an annual auction so that the fair market value is captured by the country as a whole. Existing employers should be required to pay the latest market price to maintain their visas. That would boost wages for all other workers and discriminatorily raise costs against orgs that do not want to “hire American”.

Markets and auctions are often good ways of allocating things, but a big flaw with this is that there is still some arbitrary, "magic number" of H1B visas to auction. The current number is not derived from anything empirical, it's just a number some politicians picked.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#38

Post by shadowgovt »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #24

I'm pretty sympathetic to Apple here. The article makes it sound like they did this for no reason, but the point of these hidden PERM positions is to be escape valves for the bonkers H1B system, which otherwise requires that skilled, valuable employees get booted out of the country after 3-6 years. If the government doesn't want Apple jumping through loopholes they should pass a more reasonable skilled visa program.

Still a bit hard to explain why Apple appeared to be hiding these jobs from qualified native candidates, refugees, and asylees.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#39

Post by koolba »

davidw wrote: post #37
koolba wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

H1B should be an annual auction so that the fair market value is captured by the country as a whole. Existing employers should be required to pay the latest market price to maintain their visas. That would boost wages for all other workers and discriminatorily raise costs against orgs that do not want to “hire American”.

Markets and auctions are often good ways of allocating things, but a big flaw with this is that there is still some arbitrary, "magic number" of H1B visas to auction. The current number is not derived from anything empirical, it's just a number some politicians picked.

> The current number is not derived from anything empirical, it's just a number some politicians picked.

That’s fine too. If it’s too low, companies can lobby to have it increased. If it’s too high, workers can lobby to have it reduced.

Re: Apple discriminated against US citizens in hiring, DOJ says

#40

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #30
justrealist wrote: post #9

This is the thing where when you want to sponsor a specific employee for an H1B you have to post notices pretending to look for American citizens instead. Every FAANG is guilty of this. Every startup is guilty of this. There is no law less adhered to in the US. Everyone posts the notice on the office fridge or the receptionist stand or runs some newspaper ad to cover the nominal letter of the law. It's completely poi…

Those tricks definitely occur, but they are also not required in most cases: the relevant obligations only apply when (1) the employer falls under the regulatory definition of either an H-1B dependent employer or a willful violator , BUT NOT IF (2) the candidate is paid at least $60k per year or has a relevant master’s degree. In our industry it’s rare for condition 2 to be false, even when condition 1 is true. So us…

As the article describes, a competitive job search is always required for PERM certification. The employer needs to fill out a DOL form (https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/oflc/pdfs/9089for...), in which section I(c) requires two print advertisements for the job opportunity, and section N requires certifying that the opportunity was "clearly open" to US workers but no US worker who qualified was found.
Post reply on HN