The Bottom of the Pay Scale: Wages for H-1B Computer Programmers (2005)
cis.org
cis.org
I can't quickly google the date it changed (before of after 2005?) but during the first bubble of 1999-2001, H1B holders were beholden to their employers as they were not allowed to look for another position or switch companies. The only official choice was to leave the country. This made employees virtual slaves to their employers (I was one of them) and was a great way to ensure artificially depressed wages (no competition => no risk of them leaving => so no reason to pay them a competitive wage).
I suspect, no data here, that this situation has changed a little. H1B wages may still be on the lower end of the spectrum, but that would be mostly driven by the (IMHO absolutely crazy) development of 60%+ of H1B visas going to body shops. This should change. Quotas for the Tatas. Give lone wolf applicants a chance again to come to the US and make this a better place.
PS One thing many critics of the H1B program forget: H1B holders pay into the social security system, but unless they reach the required 40 points, they have no right to collect. The only way reach 40 points is to work here 10 years (4 points per year) but the max H1B duration overall is 6. Unless they get a greencard, through marriage or company sponsorship, they only add to the coffers without the chance of collecting.
It's a short list of countries, though, and doesn't cover the top H-1B senders
A special pool for startups would be nice too, with less costs/requirements.
I'd personally be in favor of getting rid of the cap entirely or increasing it several times at least, but these might be more realistic reform ideas.
As for:
> A special pool for startups would be nice too, with less costs/requirements.
...why?
So no raises in that 4 years? And they're still tied to the company?
No. Startups should not be given special treatment. Otherwise Tata, Infosys, et al would suddenly become "startups".
That's a pretty huge caveat, given that the industry has no definition for what a startup even is.
That's the problem with the idea of auctioning off H1Bs, as far as I can see it - startups would suffer. It also turns the H1B visa into a visa for people of extra special talent, and the O1 visa already exists for that.
For "H-1B dependent employers and willful violator employers", there is a requirement to "not displace any similarly employed U.S. worker" and to "recruit U.S. workers for the job for which the alien worker is sought, at wages at least equal to those offered to the H-1B worker". That doesn't apply to normal H-1B applications.
Also, the current system isn't great for startups. There are far more H1B applicants than there are visas. There are a few large companies that bring in the majority of H1Bs. These large companies can afford to apply for thousands of H1Bs knowing that only 50% or less will be approved. A startup hiring a handful of people can't afford to put in the application for a handful of people knowing that there is a very real chance that none of them will be approved. Even if they are approved, applications need to be in several months before the visa is issued. How many startups are hiring in March for a position they won't need to fill until October?
Oh the weekly 'auction h1b' discussion.
same exact discussion from last week https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11188243
If we do go to an auction you'll see the floor slowly dropped similar to how the DHS has been expanding the OPT program in secret.
Bottom line is there isn't a STEM shortage, there is no need for H1B or OPT. It's just another form of corporate welfare at the expense of the middle class.
Tech companies don't care if we have 10000 biochemists sitting around doing nothing. STEM is a overused term.
1. Salary-based auction, 2. Do not bind employee to employer after 1 year, and 3. GoTo #1.
Of course, if a company then reduces the salary later, or does some shenanigans, nail them under the "intent to defraud the government" laws.
Some people are suggesting tweaks: make an exception for startups .... take the geo location into account ... etc. etc. That makes this more complicated, and adds more avenues for cheating. Keep it dead simple, and problem solved.
so infosys will start 500 subsidiaries and fund them VC style
If it is truly the "best and brightest", then why are they paid so low?
>Applications for 47 percent of H-1B computer programming workers were for wages below even the prevailing wage claimed by their employers.
That is pretty damning evidence. The program is clearly not being used for its intended purposes. When somewhere between 47 and 85% of H-1Bs are being significantly underpaid compared to their peers, the program is not being used to being over workers with "specialized knowledge" as they claim--but to drive down wages. It makes sense though, when you look at the biggest H-1B recipients: http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2015-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx It's all low quality outsourcing shops like Infosys, TCS, Wipro, HCL, and Cognizant.
Make the H-1B 'lottery' into an auction. Instead of accepting 65,000 H-1Bs at random--accept the 65,000 H-1Bs with the highest wages. That way we are getting the immigrants with the highest valued skills and stopping companies like Infosys, TCS, Wipro, HCL, and Cognizant that game the immigration system by applying for the cheapest H-1Bs possible.
If you can't find someone at the prevailing wage, you have to offer more. That's how the prevailing wage increases. Increasing the supply of workers willing to work for the current prevailing wage depresses wage growth--there's no way around it.
Fees and paperwork is already fairly high, so I don't think companies hire H1B to cut costs.
If H-1Bs weren't available, companies would be forced to keep raising the offered salary when they couldn't fill a position. Virtually any position can be filled given a high enough salary. Therefore if companies are choosing to hire H-1Bs instead of raising the salary to the level necessary to fill positions with US workers, then it is because it is cheaper to pay the H-1B costs.
Additionally some the highest paid foreigners are on an O1 visa, so they don't count in the "H1B average" (while the highest paid Americans are in the same bag as the others).
However, the "average programmer" salary is actually very effective when looking at the aggregate. If a programmer has skills that can't be found in a given location, you would expect them to command a very high market value, rather than an average, let alone below average market value.
Tata, Infosys, etc have ruined the H1B for what it was supposed to be used for. The government's useless bureaucratic oversight allows companies to claim that a journeyman SQL Server DBA is impossible to find in the US and hire from a body-shop instead.
The biggest victims of this are the start-ups who truly need to bring in top-caliber talent and can't get a visa in the lottery.
That means that we are hiring H-1B workers who are less skilled than the average US worker. How is that any better?
That is what the study implies. The parent says, no this is not the case because they didn't control skills and experience, so some other factor must be causing the observation that H-1B workers are paid less.
In that case the only other option to explain the results is that the average H-1B worker is less skilled or less experienced.
They lie about this on the H-1B applications and game the prevailing wage system. If you've ever applied for an H-1B then you know how easy it is to abuse the prevailing wages. The process to evaluate the skills of the applicant is simply filling out a form online for their experience level, job title, and location. Give it a test here: http://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesWizardStart.aspx It's very easy to game their job title and location to lower the salary.