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

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Updates to H-1B

#851

Post by rgbrenner »

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…

We cannot find qualified applicants. ... [a bunch of requirements] ... No, we don't pay as much as Meta. ... [some more requirements]

The shortage on $5000 ferarris continues as well.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#852

Post by CrispyKerosene »

nativeit wrote: post #676
SauciestGNU wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I work in person for less money when I can work remote? For in person work on critical applications like satellites, I'd expect (spitballing here) a staff eng to be making 300k base with substantial bonus/espp on top. Consider that most midsize tech companies are going to pay staff level 200k or above and ask how the company in question compares, before pricing in the crushing inflexibility of in person wor…

[flagged]

Shame my mortgagor doesn't accept fulfillment and meaningfulness as payment options.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#853

Post by tokioyoyo »

ponty_rick wrote: post #634
tokioyoyo wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a slowdown in tech recruitment, so it is fair for citizens to think for themselves first. There are quite a lot of candidates that can fulfill most of the roles, and it has bad optics when the government tries to prioritize others. Disclaimer: I don’t live in the states, but I can understand the frustration.

That would work in the short term. In the long term, jobs would leave the USA so companies won't have to deal with immigration uncertainties.

Doesn’t really matter. People won’t care about long term consequences if they’re experiencing hardships right now. It’s easy to say this when we have jobs, but if I didn’t have one, I would never want my government to prioritize others.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#854

Post by bravura »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #574
biztos wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to pile on, but if linear algebra is really a part of the day-to-day job and not some manager’s mistaken idea of a proxy for more general talent, then you’re hiring specialists and the pool will not be that large. People who remember all their math and enjoy it and can also code, are also very employable at all the AI companies and departments, including at Meta. And how do you know if someone’s eligible for secu…

Isn’t linear algebra heavily used in machine learning and computer graphics (not just know it, but be able to wield it proficiently)? So ya, the talent probably exists, but they hit the “these engineers are making half a million a year to do something else” problem.

There is a lot of published research work in ML that had huge impact without explicitly touching linear algebra.

Given that is the case, to answer your question: yes, linear algebra is the foundation of ML. No, a lot of impactful day-to-day ML engineering can be done without touching linear algebra.

This is how assembly is the basis of compilation and programming. But you probably are going to get a whole lot of work done without ever using it.

It's generally a nice flex when applicants can code assembly, and usually a yellow-flag when the company suggests they require knowledge of assembly.

To me, my eyebrows raise when an industry person mentions linear algebra. I'm just saying the odds are really low that you actually use it.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#855

Post by tokioyoyo »

hx8 wrote: post #635
tokioyoyo wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a slowdown in tech recruitment, so it is fair for citizens to think for themselves first. There are quite a lot of candidates that can fulfill most of the roles, and it has bad optics when the government tries to prioritize others. Disclaimer: I don’t live in the states, but I can understand the frustration.

Tech isn't a zero sum game, it's a growth market. If some H-1B talent helps grow a company faster, then they can increase their own citizen employee count faster.

That tracks only when it’s not taking 6+ months to find a stable job. It’s not really a growth market right now, and anyone who is on the hiring end/looking for a job can attest.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#856

Post by ryanackley »

briffle wrote: post #396
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…

Do you offer to sponsor people to get their security clearance? many jobs I see in the sysadmin space want someone who already has clearance, and are not willing to do the process of getting someone their clearance.

Came here to say this. I have a friend who is a manager for a defense contractor. He says that competition is fierce for people that already have clearance and they can't really hire someone to sponsor them because of how long it takes. There is a 2-3 year wait for obtaining security clearance because of a backlog caused by COVID.

The people that have it can write their own ticket and do very little work apparently.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#857

Post by asoneth »

superfrank wrote: post #466
asoneth wrote: post #336

I wonder if switching from a lottery to an auction would help curtail some of the abuse? That is, for each position a company wants to fill with a non-citizen they also have to bid on the visa fee they're willing to pay. The highest ~7,000 bids that month are accepted and paid to the government in exchange for a visa. We could debate things like sealed-bid versus open auction and uniform-price versus paying your bid…

I actually think that could end up having the opposite effect in lower paying fields. An mid level engineer at Google averages $280k/yr according to levels. A principal mechanical engineer at Boeing averages $170k/yr according to levels. If Google can pay an H1-B engineer 70% of what a non H1-B employee would get ($196k), they can bid up to 80k and still save money. Since Boeing is going for a high level employee who…

The implication that companies use H1-B visas primarily to find candidates willing to work for less (e.g. 70%) of a qualified domestic candidate seems like the underlying loophole we should try to close, not just the "fairness" of allocating which companies and fields deserve to exploit this loophole.

But your post raises a good point that money is an imperfect proxy for "value" -- a company with high profit margins can outbid leaner companies (or nonprofits) for a visa, even if the relative value of that visa to the rich company is not as high as it would have been to the other companies.

Three thoughts in response:

First, this "unfairness" doesn't seem unique to a visa auction. Isn't it already "unfair" that mediocre developers at Google earn more than expert mechanical engineers at Boeing?

Second, assuming H1-B visas lower average salaries in the fields where they're used most, then if this program ends up primarily applying to the highest-paid positions (like mid-level engineers at Google) then this might end up reducing some of the "unfairness" above.

Third, I wonder which scheme (lottery or auction) Boeing and their hypothetical H1-B candidate would prefer themselves. Tech companies already game the system and let other companies fight for scraps so having a more predictable (if expensive) pathway may end up being slightly preferable to all parties.

Re: Updates to H-1B

#858

Post by jensensbutton »

0086b416f103 wrote: post #454
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…

> We cannot find qualified applicants. Your company is incompetent. I've applied to hundreds of companies like yours within Huntsville, AL in the past year, rejected or ghosted all the time. Defense morons will talk about how hard their work is and how they can't find anyone to do it. Completely skip over how prevalent affirmative action is in their hiring process; who were you guys interviewing in 2020? Why is the d…

[flagged]

Re: Updates to H-1B

#859

Post by liontwist »

eru wrote: post #728
liontwist wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is it true or false?

The number of people in the labour force has change quite a lot over the centuries, and the number of people gainfully employed has tracked that quite closely. Ie unemployment has been relatively low and stable. (Despite eg women joining the labour force en mass over the course of the 20th century, or all the baby boomers, etc.) That suggest the null hypothesis that to a first approximation the number of jobs is dete…

what about the particulars?

What kinds of jobs are growing? Are any groups underemployed? Are standards of living increasing? For who?

> More workers seem to somehow lead to more jobs.

Imagine the US merged with Canada and Mexico. The number of jobs would probably go up until we reached a similar level of unemployment. Would everyone be better off? Is that what economic growth looks like?

Re: Updates to H-1B

#860

Post by antonvs »

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…

Since more skilled immigration can't solve the requirement, what is it you think would help?

> You (even programmers!) have to touch the things we build in order to build them

This sounds like an excuse. You think it's completely impossible to write code for some embedded device, robot, whatever remotely? Hire some cheaper remote hands, set up some telework equipment, voila now you can hire from all over the country.

I did development for a scanning optical microscope, was only once even in the same room with one, and even then never got to touch it.

Of course once that issue is eliminated, the security theater one will be raised next. People might be working from their bed next to a Russian honeypot or whatever. National security types tend to have vivid imaginations in that respect, and have to justify all their rules to themselves. The end result? "We can't find qualified applicants."

Btw I'm technically qualified, and in no way a security risk to the US, but you wouldn't be allowed to hire me. Perhaps the feds should figure out a way of doing security screening for foreign nationals. "Must be a citizen" seems like lazy bureaucratic BS. As if citizens can't be security risks?!

Post reply on HN