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

Updates to H-1B

uscis.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Updates to H-1B

#481

Post by dec0dedab0de »

dcrazy wrote: post #410
snakeyjake wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My employer cannot hire H-1Bs. You must be a US citizen to work for my company. No "US Persons" (visa holders) or foreigners allowed. You have to be eligible for a Secret security clearance. You don't have to get one if you don't want to as there is usually plenty of uncleared work to go around, but you have to be eligible in case that goes away and we need to put you in for a clearance. We cannot find qualified appl…

> You must be a US citizen to work for my company. No "US Persons" (visa holders) or foreigners allowed. This is illegal under IRCA unless another law or government contract mandates it. [1] If every single role at your company requires a Secret clearance, then I question how separate “your part of the company” really is from the part that makes weapons. [1] https://www.eeoc.gov/national-origin-discrimination

That just means that if you’re going to hire someone on a VISA you can’t discriminate which country they’re from.

I believe there is some protection against discriminating against greencards, but not visas

Re: Updates to H-1B

#482

Post by [deleted] »

zipy124 wrote: post #439
snakeyjake wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many years of experience? I fall almost exactly on the low end of this range: https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/senior-aerospace-engineer... With 15 years of experience. I'm at the low end of my peers. Like I said, auctioning off access to your users to advertisers pays better than the European space agency.

Wait the low range of that link is £45k but you say work study placement people get $75k a year?

[deleted]

Re: Updates to H-1B

#483

Post by zifpanachr23 »

p1esk wrote: post #384
snakeyjake wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My employer cannot hire H-1Bs. You must be a US citizen to work for my company. No "US Persons" (visa holders) or foreigners allowed. You have to be eligible for a Secret security clearance. You don't have to get one if you don't want to as there is usually plenty of uncleared work to go around, but you have to be eligible in case that goes away and we need to put you in for a clearance. We cannot find qualified appl…

Yes, we pay well. No, we don't pay as much as Meta. How well do you pay? If I were at Meta, my total comp would be 500-600k. I make half that at a small startup. Can you afford me?

Realistically, there are plenty of competent people they could hire for any low six figures amount (unless they are directly in the DC area, in which case add 20-30k for cost of living). 500-600k or half of that is a unicorn salary that doesn't apply to those industries or areas and is irrelevant to the discussion. Even if they offered you that salary you wouldn't take it because the work environment would be radically different from working at a bloated web tech firm, or working at a silicon valley startup.

Totally different markets. You wouldn't be interested in that job, and they wouldn't want to hire you even if you were interested. Even the tone of your post makes that obvious.

We should be discussing early to mid career folks from somewhere other than silicon valley startup or big web tech land. Aka "meat and potatoes" tech jobs. That is what's being discussed.

I don't know what their problem is with hiring either and I agree with you that it could be partially compensation related. But not being able to compete with Silicon Valley on compensation is not where I would be going with that argument....I think it's more likely to be related to environment and interview style and notions of what "experience" means. In other words...bad hiring practices...not necessarily raw compensation issues. The compensation for non "big tech" firms can sometimes be quite good in comparison to other career paths especially when located outside of the valley, so being unable to hire talent makes me suspicious of hiring practices more than compensation (assuming they are reasonably large and hit market rate for the area and are in a reasonably large metro).

Just my two cents.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#484

Post by JSteph22 »

cherryteastain wrote: post #366
BurningFrog wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a market with free pricing there are , pretty much by definition, no shortages or surpluses. Instead prices go up or down until supply and demand meet. So talking about "shortages" in this context doesn't really make sense to me. Yet that's the terminology in this field, and the resulting confusion is unavoidable.

> On a market with free pricing there are, pretty much by definition, no shortages or surpluses. Remember the "chip shortage" all throughout the pandemic? It's not like the whole world switched to a Soviet style command economy between 2020 and 2022 yet we still had it.

This example proves OP's point. It was only a "shortage" in name.

If you were willing to pay more than the market rate, there was no problem in finding chips.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#485

Post by ritcgab »

lubujackson wrote: post #299
ritcgab wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guy who born with natural citizenship is too privileged to imagine how hard it is to get a green card.

Great comeback, except you completely ignore the point (its purpose is not meant to be a backdoor) and attack him for... being an American? Instead of telling everyone else to check their privilege, maybe check your expectations. The world doesn't owe anyone anything. Claiming your desires are everyone else's problem is a deeply self-centered way to view the world.

H-1B is dual intent by definition, so it is not a backdoor. Any sane person who knows how green card application works understands that it is objectively hard, if not the hardest in the whole world.

> Instead of telling everyone else to check their privilege, maybe check your expectations.

Without such an expectation, who would pay tens of thousands a year to enroll in a random U.S. college, only to be told that there is absolutely no way they can work legally there?

Re: Updates to H-1B

#486

Post by DanAtC »

snakeyjake wrote: post #342
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #161

A supposed shortage of qualified US applicants for tech jobs, especially software developers, doesn't jibe with the huge numbers of US developers currently looking for work, including highly experienced older workers suffering from age discrimination. I'd be surprised if more than 5-10% of H-1B positions are ones where the hiring company has even looked for US applicants.

My employer cannot hire H-1Bs. You must be a US citizen to work for my company. No "US Persons" (visa holders) or foreigners allowed. You have to be eligible for a Secret security clearance. You don't have to get one if you don't want to as there is usually plenty of uncleared work to go around, but you have to be eligible in case that goes away and we need to put you in for a clearance. We cannot find qualified appl…

Security clearances are a giant hassle. Why go through all that for less than FAANG pay?

Re: Updates to H-1B

#487

Post by schappim »

It's encouraging to see DHS attempting to update the H-1B program in ways that address longstanding pain points like the unpredictability of transferring jobs, the complexity around defining a "specialty occupation," and the painfully slow application processes. The US economy benefits when companies can more easily hire and retain the talent they genuinely need, rather than having the system incentivise questionable staffing practices or endless guesswork over whether a given degree is "close enough" to the job description.

However, this final rule doesn't magically solve the deeper structural issues. For example, the per-country caps on green cards still leave many H-1B workers stuck in decades-long queues if they're from certain countries. That reality discourages risk-taking, entrepreneurship, and long-term roots,something that runs counter to the very idea of welcoming skilled people. While allowing spouses to work and making it easier to switch roles will improve day-to-day life for some, the broader immigration pipeline remains complicated and slow.

The real test will be in implementation and enforcement. Will the new definitions and stricter oversight actually reduce abuse by staffing firms who've flooded the lottery with dubious registrations? Will the simplified criteria for specialty occupations translate to smoother hiring and fewer headaches for workers and employers alike?

In short: good steps, but we're still a long way from a truly balanced system that reliably identifies, welcomes, and retains global talent without leaving them in extended legal limbo. It's progress, but the ultimate success depends on how these rules play out in the real world,and whether future administrations build on these changes instead of rolling them back.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#488

Post by hankchinaski »

snakeyjake wrote: post #342
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #161

A supposed shortage of qualified US applicants for tech jobs, especially software developers, doesn't jibe with the huge numbers of US developers currently looking for work, including highly experienced older workers suffering from age discrimination. I'd be surprised if more than 5-10% of H-1B positions are ones where the hiring company has even looked for US applicants.

My employer cannot hire H-1Bs. You must be a US citizen to work for my company. No "US Persons" (visa holders) or foreigners allowed. You have to be eligible for a Secret security clearance. You don't have to get one if you don't want to as there is usually plenty of uncleared work to go around, but you have to be eligible in case that goes away and we need to put you in for a clearance. We cannot find qualified appl…

In other words you are looking for people who are willing to get paid less what they are worth

Re: Updates to H-1B

#490

Post by pas »

brewdad wrote: post #460
macNchz wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you drug test? Sounds like a place that might. A fairly significant proportion (though definitely not all) of the best developers I've ever worked with would simply pass over places that seem like they would.

You aren't getting a clearance if you can't pass a drug test.

Having eligibility is not the same as passing unannounced random drug tests.
Post reply on HN