51–60 of 72 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The plan to make raise the minimum salary for H1B so that it cannot be used to save money. And to slow down the application process, increase fees and force people to rely on premium processing more.
You know what'd be better? Put up H1B approvals on auction instead of handing them out in a lottery.
6 years = H1B + 1 renewal
Cognizant, Tata, Infosys, the list goes on, the all have been gaming the system for 30 years now to funnel people to the US like Mexican Coyoties. They're not in the game to hire US people, it's all about funneling as many Southeast Asians as possible here. Talking to many friends over years having been through it to come here, I view it a bit like old (like 18th century old) indentured servitude of Europeans trying…
> US to drop an anchor kid to force naturalization I've always wondered why the US didn't change this law (to right of blood)? The current approach was created when the US was just a colony and needed a quick injection of people. Now it doesn't make much sense and creates a plethora of problems as I understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There was also talk in a video I think from Jamelle Bouie of the NYT talking about these groups going further and declaring anyone that subsequently went on to be naturalized while living here under these and other programs to have their citizenship revoked. Does he actually have some evidence they're planning on doing that, and have plausible plans to execute it , or is it the typical hyperbolic fear-mongering fro…
Here's a fact sheet from the ACLU which covers the USCIS denaturalization unit created by Trump during his last administration. [0] Biden dismantled the unit, and part of Project 2025 is reimplementing it. > typical hyperbolic fear-mongering from Trump's opponents Let me be clear. There is nothing hyperbolic about Project 2025. The Heritage Foundation, a prominent Republican think tank, is spearheading it. Hundreds o…
That sounds nothing like "declaring anyone that subsequently went on to be naturalized while living here under these [H1-B] and other programs to have their citizenship revoked." It's more like hyper-strict enforcement of existing law, about making material false statements on a naturalization application.
Cognizant, Tata, Infosys, the list goes on, the all have been gaming the system for 30 years now to funnel people to the US like Mexican Coyoties. They're not in the game to hire US people, it's all about funneling as many Southeast Asians as possible here. Talking to many friends over years having been through it to come here, I view it a bit like old (like 18th century old) indentured servitude of Europeans trying…
> drop an anchor kid to force naturalization This doesn’t work the way many assume. Yes, it’s true, the kid ends up a citizen by birth. But the kid can’t sponsor the parent for permanent residence until the kid is 21 years old, there are financial requirements the kid has to meet as a sponsor, processing the application still takes at least at least a year or two after that, citizenship takes additional years (usuall…
Cognizant, Tata, Infosys, the list goes on, the all have been gaming the system for 30 years now to funnel people to the US like Mexican Coyoties. They're not in the game to hire US people, it's all about funneling as many Southeast Asians as possible here. Talking to many friends over years having been through it to come here, I view it a bit like old (like 18th century old) indentured servitude of Europeans trying…
The frustrating thing about all of this is that Cognizant didn't really get in trouble for blatantly abusing the H1B program, but for discriminating against non-Indians. If they'd just keep their non-Indian workers happy, they could've, in all likelihood, continued abusing the H1B program forever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> drop an anchor kid to force naturalization This doesn’t work the way many assume. Yes, it’s true, the kid ends up a citizen by birth. But the kid can’t sponsor the parent for permanent residence until the kid is 21 years old, there are financial requirements the kid has to meet as a sponsor, processing the application still takes at least at least a year or two after that, citizenship takes additional years (usuall…
Maybe not guaranteed, but still certainly creates a certain problem of deporting the parents when they can't the child, not to mention general sympathy of splitting families and such, and no one wants to be on the news for that.
Although they can't deport the child, most parents would still bring the child with them if they're being deported in the interest of being able to continue to act as the child's parents, unless the government makes no effort to enable that kind of family unity to be possible during the deportation process, or unless there's a trusted close relative in the US who can give the child a sufficiently better life apart from their parents than whatever mess the parents might be returning to in their country of origin to outweigh the family separation.
I'd love to see stats if you have them regarding cases where a deportation would leave a US citizen kid with no parents who continue to reside in the US and where the government offers to let the parents choose to bring their US citizen kids with them during the deportation at government expense. (Parents in this situation often couldn't afford to reimburse the government for such costs.) Family law generally allows parents to bring their kids with them (below age 18) regardless of the kids' citizenship, at least if no parent is arguing in court for a different outcome.
My expectation is that most parents given that option would choose to keep their kids with them, and that any resulting family separation which wouldn't already exist without a US citizen kid is simply because the government isn't prioritizing family unity in this context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a fact sheet from the ACLU which covers the USCIS denaturalization unit created by Trump during his last administration. [0] Biden dismantled the unit, and part of Project 2025 is reimplementing it. > typical hyperbolic fear-mongering from Trump's opponents Let me be clear. There is nothing hyperbolic about Project 2025. The Heritage Foundation, a prominent Republican think tank, is spearheading it. Hundreds o…
> Here's a fact sheet from the ACLU which covers the USCIS denaturalization unit created by Trump during his last administration. [0] That sounds nothing like "declaring anyone that subsequently went on to be naturalized while living here under these [H1-B] and other programs to have their citizenship revoked." It's more like hyper-strict enforcement of existing law, about making material false statements on a natura…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's general publicly traded shittery, and then there's WITCH (for reference, WiPro, Infosys, Tata, Cognizant, HCL). I've seen shitty expense cutting in many publicly traded companies, but there's like this chasm between the norm and industrial grade bullshit. Usually outside of WITCH or directly WITCH-influenced places (because let's be honest, nobody works in isolation, so the same managerial styles percolate as…
I think it's a bit silly to act as if the divides are so clear, as if industries don't become a soup-of-shit . Everyone learns these things from somewhere, trade shows have many attendees, etc. Players larger than any of these make several identical plays at once . They specialize while others build empires. All of my recent experience has been SRE work - in these businesses, it's just as you describe. Bait/switch op…
The thing is, turning a warm body into useful employee is, depending on task, not hard. But the experience dealing with WiPro, TCS, Infosys, and experience of others with Cognizant and HCL added to that, suggests that they don't even try, put KPIs that are in opposition with "useful service", and then lie to everyone including the employee. Like, at least someone employed to tell you why it doesn't matter you paid for your policy for years, it's not going to pay out, at least knows they are there to screw customers.
I can get useful junior data center operator out of a reasonably healthy warm body that I can communicate with (and there's at least one memorable time where we achieved success in remote hands case without mutually intelligible communications while over the phone), but that's like few levels above what I expect from WITCH and their ilk (because yes, other companies in areas dominated by them will end up hiring people from them with certain set behaviours who will then manage their groups in same way...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a bit silly to act as if the divides are so clear, as if industries don't become a soup-of-shit . Everyone learns these things from somewhere, trade shows have many attendees, etc. Players larger than any of these make several identical plays at once . They specialize while others build empires. All of my recent experience has been SRE work - in these businesses, it's just as you describe. Bait/switch op…
That's why I went for the term "thermocline", because it's not so much a hard divide, as more a moving, floating border at certain point in the spectrum where it seems the signs flip on certain values. The thing is, turning a warm body into useful employee is, depending on task, not hard. But the experience dealing with WiPro, TCS, Infosys, and experience of others with Cognizant and HCL added to that, suggests that…
The body is regularly an 'accountability sink' (forgive likely abuse of the term). Sure, they can be made to do the job. They often don't [prepare or participate]. Hell, they have a robot to meet the requirement of posting a reply within a certain timeframe. It's a charade
I guess, most simply, I don't find them considerably worse as consultants than those who they consult for. I have yet to find a job where people - or whole departments/subsidiaries - don't behave as you describe. Truly constant.
Anyone who works for a company being acquired by EIG knows what's about to happen: set phasers to 'screw customers'. Along the lines of "Sorry, your shared hosting account includes five processes. Googlebot keeps you suspended by trying for 100." This stuff is commonplace/systemic, available to be seen by those so inclined.
Considering the gaps between knowing, admitting, or simply perpetuating... I don't think it's worth figuring out to such detail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Here's a fact sheet from the ACLU which covers the USCIS denaturalization unit created by Trump during his last administration. [0] That sounds nothing like "declaring anyone that subsequently went on to be naturalized while living here under these [H1-B] and other programs to have their citizenship revoked." It's more like hyper-strict enforcement of existing law, about making material false statements on a natura…
Yes this is exactly it, any remote thing that can disqualify people that is today forgiven, and additionally, where Chevron comes in, that a lot of these norms are rules within departments where such things can be evaluated, but Project 2025 says if it isn't a law or statute then it doesn't matter, and that includes any concept of a person living here but not a full, naturalized citizen.
No that's not at all "exactly it." Do you realize you're moving the goalposts?
Looking for flaws in an applications according to existing critera is totally different than somehow retroactively declaring the previous regulations were invalid and screwing everyone who relied on them by revoking their naturalization.
> where Chevron comes in, that a lot of these norms are rules within departments where such things can be evaluated
Chevron says if there's a controversy over those things, a court needs to resolve it without giving total deference to the department. It doesn't say those "norms are rules" must be struck down, it just says a court will decided if they're following the law.
> but Project 2025 says if it isn't a law or statute then it doesn't matter, and that includes any concept of a person living here but not a full, naturalized citizen.
You seem to be saying here that there's no law or statute that allows for any state besides "full, naturalized citizen," and that's just so totally not true that it's bonkers you're claiming it.