The idea usually is that the presence of an H1B means that someone local does not exist to do the job, which means that a company would otherwise have to pay more than the going rate to poach someone else from another company. Then the company losing the employee has to pay more to poach from somewhere else, and so on, until eventually everyone who is suitable for such a position is making more.
The fact that H1Bs are paid what the locals are paid is exactly the issue people have when they talk about wage suppression. It is in much the same vein as when Apple/Google/et al. agreed to not steal each others employees. It is not like those employees were exactly hurting for compensation, but they theoretically could have made more without that treaty between companies.
For reference, this is how it works in Japan, for example. A company can sponsor your visa (which is basically some paperwork). But you get a fixed period in which you can work, and you can change companies without having to do anything except signal a company change to the immigration office. Very low friction
As a side-note, me changing jobs fairly dramatically increased my salary. I could presumably (I did not negotiate with old employer but a colleague did when he was about to leave) have gotten the same salary at my old place just by showing the new offer. I don't really see where the difference to a citizen is in this whole exercise.
([1] this is so because even if in the worst case you were kicked out of the country you could still reclaim the remaining time on the H1B so the worst case is still limited and I know of zero such cases.)
The way it works with large bodyshops is, let's say, HP runs a software team of 20 paying everybody $100k. Infosys or other "consulting" company then shows up and offers to run the same project at the cost of $1.6 mil. Immense savings, so HP signs the deal.
Infosys then runs the H1 posting advertising 20 position paying $45,000 each. Their US operations are headquartered somewhere in NJ, so it passes the US Department of Labor snuff test of adequate standard wage. It's also understood that a consulting company might have its consultants deployed on premises, all depends on the client.
As very few locals apply for $45k jobs in NJ, Infosys staffs the project with its own H1 applicants who are then immediately to start work at client's location in Cupertino or Seattle.
* Usage of names like HP, Infosys and New Jersey is illustrative, not factual. It just helps to understand how margins are made in bodyshop industry.
Yep. They seem to favor cramming them into the nearest apartments (if possible in walking distance). It's probably optional, but your options are limited when you're getting paid dick, looking for housing in an area with higher cost of living and you're trying to send money home. I'm not saying it's not a comparatively good opportunity for them but they could be paid more fairly.
In simple economic terms, yes, supply and demand exist, and if you reduce the supply of software engineers their salary will go up. However, canning the H1-B program is only one way to reduce supply. One could also limit the number of computer science degrees granted by US universities, and that would increase software engineer wages too. Is such protectionism justified? Probably not. But a lot of people seem to take an "ends justifies the means" approach when arguing against immigration.
With H1B you are not tied to the same employer, you are free to leave the sponsoring employer and go elsewhere. I don't know about the E-1 visa. Again, if you feel they were being paid below the market rate, you can check up the bulletin board to make sure.
or it just gets accepted as cost of doing business with this person. Which is entirely reasonable (you spend a couple thousand to get everything transferred, not that much long run).
isn't the problem that if an h1-b worker gets fired they are screwed (have to leave)? I know with a TN that's the case and it sucks.
If a native employee is fired, they lose their job and probably go on unemployment while the look for another one.
If an H-1B employee is fired, they get deported.
Employers know this, and they treat H-1B employees accordingly.
That was definitely not true during my time on H1B. The feds could legally deport you, but they never bothered to.
"Some company"? No law abiding company can do what you're saying, let's get real. This is illegal. This is the reason that these fraudulent "staffing" companies exist in the first place since they know the employee will never be a whistle blower and for the love of god I don't understand why?
The solution is never that simple. Unfortunately for many of them they're butts to fill seats for signed contracts. They go out on 6+ month on-sites and live with several roommates working for the same company. They can't pick up and leave because they're not qualified enough or experienced enough.
anecdata...
The claimed point of H1B is to benefit Americans and the American economy by filling positions which have a temporary shortage, in a way that does not drive down wages. Of course that's not even close to how it works in practice.
It's a moot point on whether H1B helps or hurts the US economy. It's up to the US govt. and eventually the voters to decide what strategies should be adopted in keeping the US at the top the technology sector.
20 years later sure, he's the CEO of Microsoft.
In a country that valued their citizens, these companies would have to pay higher salaries as the demand increased, and as a result more people would chose this career path, thereby reaching a market equilibrium. If these companies moved jobs overseas, they would be liable for more taxes to offset the job losses, so they would be discouraged to do so. The fact that nobody talks about these simple strategies just shows that companies have done a great job to preach their message to the US government and workers.
The "natural law of supply and demand", specifically, the supply side doesn't magically stop at the border of a country. If anything, protectionism is against the free market ideal. Labor is just another resources like any other, and the extreme version of free market would include free immigration.
Yes, a libertarian free market only society might not be in anyone benefits, and any regulation to limit them might have some merit. But we should really call a spade a spade.
Free trade laws don't appear out of thin ether either, it is companies that lobby politicians to create such laws -- while at the same time claiming to the public that they are inevitable. This is a distorted ideology that needs to be opposed, not just observed as if it were good or inevitable.
It seems like you're implying that supply and demand cannot exist without the libertarian free market. Supply and demand can exist in any system even ones constrained by managed economics or artificial restrictions.
A better strategy is to ensure US domination of technology development through any means possible.
Besides, it isn't like wages for tech workers are low in the US.
American tech would be a shell of what it is without foreign labour.
Israel is nascent and not very comparable, plus they do pull in a lot of global talent, germany also to a much greater extent than japan.
also, I'm not saying you can't have a 'viable' industry without importing good talent. I'm just saying it won't be as good.
For example, mean pay for a software developer in state of California is $119,970 according to Bureau of Labor Statistics [1]. What is the minimum wage required for a H1B software developer in California [2]? What is the actual mean pay?
My instinct is that you are correct and H1B visas are not driving down salaries- but thats just a guess, I have no idea. But your arguments so far are "dont be a bigot" and "its all public information".
If its public information, have you seen it? If so, share it with us. If not, how are you sure you are correct?
If you are just venting, then vent away my friend.
Otherwise, it is ineffective to fight bigotry by telling people they are bigots. Share data from a trusted source, give sound analysis, and hope for the best.
Good luck.
1. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151132.htm
2. I would have dug this up myself but its actually a bit of work to compile as a meaningful look at this issue requires looking at many geographical areas and professions.
If all American workers earn less, then cost of living drops too and it's not much of a problem.
How many years of experience (0,5,10,15,20?)? What is the education level required (PhD vs bachelors/masters)? It's not as simple as "H1B software developer in California" nor are the salaries. They vary between companies (eg., Netflix pays more than Google)
In any case, here you go: http://h1bdata.info/ You can check what your H1B colleagues make based on their job title.
Edit: To x0x0, I'm not going to parse out data for each and every company, I have a day job you see :) I've worked for four companies (public and private), and I see that the wages are comparable to local workers (of those who chose to share their wages) and the established market rate by the state dept. of labor for the said job title. Somewhat anecdotal? Yes. It is definitely better than a blanket "H1B drives down wages".
I am not an expert. I also do not have time to understand the data. That is why all I am comfortable saying is, my gut instinct is that H1B visa's dont drive down salaries (more than adding more workers affects salaries) but I dont know for certain.
The next best thing we can do is look in the literature for someone who has done this analysis. I like scholar.google.com.
If we dont even have time for that, I guess its just not that important and we just go through life not knowing, hopeful that the day will come when we will see a reddit link to a blog post about a behind-paywall news article summarizing an academic analysis.
C'est la vie.
3.6m software engineers in the US; if even half of h1b holders are devs that's a sizeable increase. Even under modest demand elasticity assumptions you can back of napkin estimate a large influence
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2483690/it-careers/indi...
Wait a minute, I re-read my initial statement, this is what I said:
> "I am replying to those who make claims that H1B workers are being paid below market rate, hence driving down salaries."
I mention specifically about H1B workers are not being paid below market rate. So the salaries of H1B workers is not the cause of the driving down the wages.
To your argument, will an abundant supply of labor cause the salaries to go down or stagnate? Yes.
You might feel that you could convince immigration hardliners by this argument but in reality most are motivated by ideology rather than rationality. At the same time you will alienate other indians.
With lotteries, 7+ year racist country based quotas and 12 Million undocumented immigrants it's a system which long due for a comprehensive reform don't waste time defending it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone and I personally don't care what other Indians (as I'm Indian) think about my opinion. I only represent my opinion not theirs (and they are free to have their own and disagree with mine).
On your immigration comment, if you are an American citizen you have the right to claim what you say about the immigration situation in the US. As far as I am concerned, I have no say in the immigration debate as an H1B worker. All I am concerned about is to work on challenging problems and advance my career, that's it. I am not using the so called H1B "restrictions" as an excuse for all ills as a potential immigrant.
With an argument like this no doubt you are parroting stupidity. Wake up Ashwin, life is not just about advancin career.
> "To claim that by virtue of not being an American Citizen I have no right to offer an informed opinion based on moral analysis"
Again, I never said you can't have an opinion. You have your opinion and I have mine. We agree to disagree and I like to live in reality rather than hyperbole.
Did you arrive in the US in a clunky boat fearing for your life and running away from a despot on an H1B?
Please don't compare the challenges of H1B workers to events in which people were actually murdered or lived in fear of their death. It's ridiculous.
If your premonition of being sacrificed is true, oh my, what would I do if I lose my job? I would be so lost...lol! I have the confidence (not arrogance) in my abilities to find another one :) And BTW, I was laid off my first job in late 2008 (during the recession) and I found another job. And this confidence comes from the fact that I take my career goals seriously and don't hide behind the veil of a fake victim.
It comments like these that make me believe you like to stereotype people. That does not help your arguments. The most absolute racist people I have ever met were from Washington DC and it would be wrong to assume everyone there was a racist.
And you don't? If you were in a dark alley and saw a guy in a hoodie what would you think? Exactly, it's called stereotyping :)
You can twist the meaning and nitpick my comment all you want. Of course I don't mean all people, does everything need to be spelled out explicitly?
Are you serious, you never heard of families under strain because 6 years into their Green Card application they had to suddenly leave, while at the same time other countries citizen could get a job. Or where someone on OPT couldn't leave to visit their dying parents since his attorney warned him that he might not be given entry. Not everyone is born with silverspoon. Or families torn apart. All that means nothing?
Your extensive use of "I" indicates general inability to empathize. with such a narcissistic frame of reference no doubt everything is "fake" according to you.
Asking for just, fair and equal treatment regardless of the nationality and place of birth is not being a "fake victim". It's a cause worth fighting for.
>"Why should birthplace of a person be allowed as a criteria for discrimination."
Because that is the law of the land and it is fair since the number of green cards are allotted EQUALLY to all countries [1]. We just happen to be from a country where there are more number of applicants than green cards available. If it were discriminatory, why did the EB priority dates of China move up multiple years? It's because the EB applications from Chinese nationals have dropped considerably, not because the US is suddenly schmoozing to Chinese nationals.
> "you never heard of families under strain because 6 years into their Green Card application they had to suddenly leave"
Life events happen (do you expect your life to be smooth sailing?) and you have to take decisions based on it. Let me tell you something, H1B is way way more permissive than work visas in most of Europe and Middle East. Chew on that for a minute.
> "Or where someone on OPT couldn't leave to visit their dying parents"
This cannot be a regular occurrence. Again, this is hyperbole.
> "Or families torn apart. All that means nothing?"
Were you kidnapped from your family and brought to the US in a shipping container with 100's of other people? All of us "left our families" and came here with our own FREE WILL. No one brought you here against your free will.
I use "I" because these are my opinions and I don't speak for anyone else. I definitely do not empathize with hyperbole, I can tell you that :)
Please read the link below before passing judgments on hearsay.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/259076-why...
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/5/13/grass-greener-eb...
Stop being emotional and falling for arguments that favor your point of view.
"In 2011, it passed overwhelmingly in the House by 389 to 15."
"Per-country quotas restrict individuals from any single country seeking to come to the U.S. to no more than 7 percent of the green cards available in any category in any year. This restriction favors those from small countries at the expense of those from larger ones. By treating nationality as the relevant factor, India is treated equally with Luxembourg, but Indian immigrants are massively disadvantaged. Equality in theory, inequality in practice. It is a system of expedited processing for people from less populous countries; it is arbitrary and unfair. The large countries that are most disadvantaged — the Philippines, India, China and Mexico — are all non-European nations that, until recently, had little ethnic representation in the U.S.
While the issue is ignored, the lines for visas have stretched to absurd lengths. Adult children of U.S. citizens from Mexico, Philippines, India and China can expect seven- to 21-year waiting periods. Workers from China, India and the Philippines with a college degree or less will have to wait between two and 10 years.
There are no legitimate reasons for this discrimination for any immigrants, but the system is particularly perverse for employment-based immigrants. Arbitrarily delaying hires punishes the American economy, costing us productivity, innovation and competitiveness. "
An argument that was accepted by a significant majority of congressmen but is simply pending due to refusal by immigration hardliners to reach any kind of compromise on undocumented immigration.
By the argument, any legal discrimination that blankets entire groups of people with the same random chance is right and fair. Slavery - OK as long as blacks kidnapped from any African country were treated equally. Segregation - OK as long as blacks anywhere in America got the same treatment. It sounds like a wind-up, but really immigration discrimination is just like race or gender discrimination. It's not fair. The difference is that popular culture hasn't graced it with its wand of disapproval so most people can't recognize it.
Please explain to me how a 7% cap per year on all countries is discriminatory and not fair?
As I've mentioned earlier to secondtimeuse, please don't compare the challenges of H1B workers to events in which people were actually murdered or lived in fear of their death. It's ridiculous.
1. Let salaries be classified in tiers. 100K 110K 120K etc. These tiers are classified and published only after an year. 2. Let companies bid for every employee based on how valuable the employee is. say a company bids for X at $120K p.a. 2. Sort the bids in descending level. Each company will then have to pay their employee a salary that is at least as much as the lowest salary in that tier.
1. Genuine candidates: I'm going to quote the extreme, people like Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Vinod Khosla etc. came to the US on H1B and there are a lot of other "superstars" on H1B or naturalized citizens. More practically, there are thousands of other talented people from all countries who work on H1B. So the argument that H1B should be done away with is absurd, unless the US doesn't care about staying atop of the technology sector. Also, H1B workers get paid the same as local workers; there is a minimum wage requirement that has to be satisfied by the company applying for the H1B. So if you buy the allegation that wages are being depressed by H1B workers, why don't you take a peek at the bulletin board of your break room (which have H1B applications with salaries posted) or online and lodge a complaint with the state department of labor rather than posting bigoted comments?
2. Candidates hired by "staffing" companies: Blanket applications made by these "staffing" companies which may or may not have actual jobs. These are the applications that need to be stopped/scrutinized by USCIS (they have tightened this during the recession 2008-2010). It's arguable there is a genuine requirement for staffing companies, but these need to be scrutinized thoroughly.