Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
431–440 of 571 posts
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
Locals who are trying to get jobs for themselves shouldn't be told that they can get a job through this process.
So you’re admitting that applying for jobs they should be able to get , in a place they should be able to apply in , under federal law is not going to work? Sounds like fraud to me. Or a crime of some sort. If they do it, and it clearly doesn’t work, it even sounds like something they could take to court. In fact, something that is perhaps their duty to take to court.
You're reading too much into it. It's a case of bad UX. The jobs do not exist. The actual job application/interview etc. happened years ago, when it did exist, and everyone, including locals, had the same shot at it. When the job existed, someone was hired for it, and it happened to be someone on a visa. In order to keep that person employed in this job and get them a green card, the government requires that the job be advertised again afresh. It's a non-sensical requirement that was added because some politican or lobbyist asked for it. The natural way to add protectionism to this model would have been to add it at the outset, but that clearly wouldn't work for the economy. So a compromise was engineered. Companies can hire anyone generally as long as they are, in principle, temporary. When it comes to keeping them permanently, the government requires that they do this charade of posting ads again and doing a market test etc.
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think US workers should have to compete with 1 billion+ other global workers for their jobs Why not? Also friendly reminder 99.999% of US population is made of immigrants.
As of January 2025, the U.S. has an immigrant population of 53.3 million people, making up 15.8% of the total population. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/21/key-findi... https://usafacts.org/immigration/
And of the remaining 300+M virtually none are native americans ;)
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
How dare that loser want a cushy, well paying job. This is America, that's not allowed for them. We like our workers desperate.
This, I cannot believe how all the most pro-workers rights people I know also support "open borders"-like philosophies. What do you think is going to happen to your bargaining power as an employee when your employer has an infinite workforce to draw from?
[deleted]
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The de jure description for why h1bs would be allowed is due to them, again _ostensibly_, having skills or a specific skillset that could not be found in a reasonable time frame and are worth importing. There is no such description in law (this is what de jure means) so I have no clue why you think so. >I was under the impression that h1bs positions were supposed to pay a “higher than prevailing wage” They are. It d…
Ok, then I guess what I am trying to figure out is how to build a system that is the same as my de jure description. I was under the impression that was the case and do not need you to prove to me otherwise. But I agreed with that de jure description and would like a system that achieves that
The ways to build the system you desire are simple; the political challenges though are insurmountable. This isn't rocket science. However, there has been no substantial legislative change in this area in over 30 years. The current morass of H-1B, PERM etc. is a carefully engineered compromise to keep all demanding factions - the restrictionists, the capitalists, the left and the right, acceptably (un)happy.
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems like a fair way for the free market to address things, no? If you need special carve outs, create a new type of Visa for those special cases. The immigrants are all going to be paying taxes on their earnings. If you can boost H1B salaries by an average of $20k/yr by doing a price auction, that brings govt revenue and maybe even gives opportunities to balance the budget by creating more H1B slots.
What do you mean “fair”? What happens in the years/decades between when this hypothetical system is enacted and when the US can train up sufficient workers to substitute the labor force we currently have with H1-B? Your proposal will mean 99% of all of the H1-B allocation will go to hedge fund quants and 1% maybe go to an AI researcher, but all of the materials science (eg. Cutting edge battery tech), semiconductor f…
> hedge fund quants
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s interesting that the U.S. picked an employer-driven model, which effectively outsources immigration selection to firms. That’s efficient for demand-matching, but it concentrates bargaining power in ways that a points-based model avoids. The practical effect of an H1-B is to act as a non-compete, punitive termination clause, and a time bounded employment contract. These are very expensive terms to ask for in conv…
> It’s interesting that the U.S. picked an employer-driven model... Health insurance, parental leave† and retirement are also employer-driven. This seems to be a US default that incidentally gives a lot of leverage to employers. † Yes there are government mandated minimums, but when compared to other developed countries, substantive parental leave is largely left to the generosity of the employer
why did it work out that way in the US?
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
My comment was in response to your claim that EB system was created for people with rare skills, which it clearly isn’t. You were in a job that only 1000 people were able to do, you being one of them. And yet you suggested that EB1 would more laborious and not fit for you. > You may be eligible for an employment-based, first-preference visa if you are an alien of extraordinary ability, are an outstanding professor or…
As I said, EB-1 does not require rare skills. PERM based EB-2 and 3, though, require that there are no US workers with such skills available so it's highly correlated with skill's rarity. So why and where would I say that the entire EB system is created for people with rare skills? >> You may be eligible for an employment-based, first-preference visa if you are an alien of extraordinary ability, are an outstanding pr…
The lack is established by a good faith recruitment process, not an exhaustive search. This is intentionally vague because it's a non-sensical requirement that is hard to prove one way or the other and was only added as a political compromise. The company is free to tailor the minimum requirements to its liking. Recall that this is a free capitalistic country. So you can establish that you can't fill the req. locally and hence are hiring a foreigner. The reason I'm pointing this out is because you have picked some type of textual or literal interpretation of things ("this is what EB is for"), and companies have lawyers who are good at following the text.
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s interesting that the U.S. picked an employer-driven model... Health insurance, parental leave† and retirement are also employer-driven. This seems to be a US default that incidentally gives a lot of leverage to employers. † Yes there are government mandated minimums, but when compared to other developed countries, substantive parental leave is largely left to the generosity of the employer
why did it work out that way in the US?
During WWII there were wage freezes so employers started providing benefits:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-reason-th...
> In 1942, with so many eligible workers diverted to military service, the nation was facing a severe labor shortage. Economists feared that businesses would keep raising salaries to compete for workers, and that inflation would spiral out of control as the country came out of the Depression. To prevent this, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9250, establishing the Office of Economic Stabilization.
> This froze wages. Businesses were not allowed to raise pay to attract workers.
> Businesses were smart, though, and instead they began to use benefits to compete. Specifically, to offer more, and more generous, health care insurance.
> Then, in 1943, the Internal Revenue Service decided that employer-based health insurance should be exempt from taxation. This made it cheaper to get health insurance through a job than by other means.
----
Hysterical raisins strikes again.
Re: Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not a zero sum game (long term). Immigrants and their children have founded companies that have employed thousands of American citizens and created trillions of dollars of wealth. Stopping what has worked for your country because "…reasons…" is extremely shortsighted.
It is an exception used to justify the rule. There is a very small percentage that founded companies and the rest are impacting negatively the economy.
> the rest are impacting negatively the economy