Hacker News Reader

Comment by mjevans | Hacker News Reader

I feel like this proposed bill doesn't go far enough.

H-1B visas should ONLY be granted for workers that are in such need that they are above the 90th percentile of pay for that role. They should also be limited to no more commitment to the company than their peer workers.

Once within the country, an H-1B worker should also be able to leave for other employment (without the top market rate requirement) whenever they choose and with a 6-12 month grace period for finding new work if they quit or are laid off.

The entire point should be about bringing valuable future citizens in to the country, and the program should definitely be a strong path to citizenship.

It also makes sense to have a different (easier to get) type of immigration for workers that want to start a company (and have most of those jobs) within the US.

View on HN

As someone that came through Canada's equivalent of the H1-B system, I think the Canadian system gets it mostly right:

- A points system based on a combination of industry requirement, education, experience and English/French language ability

- Permanent resident from day one

- No restrictions on moving employer or province

- Health insurance coverage after 90 days (Ontario)

- Citizenship after 3 years (once Bill C-24 is repealed)

http://www.cic.gc.ca/English/immigrate/skilled/index.asp

That's very generous

That is horrendous, Trump 2016!

I have Indian friends in Canada who were hired for an American company but are currently in a Canada office since the company plans to L1 them (which is much easier since getting an H1B as an Indian citizen is hard). I have been (unsuccessfully) trying to convince them stay and avoid the tons of issues that US immigration has. Well, one of them wants to stay in Canada, but I think he wanted to from the start since he was aware of these things too.

I myself was considering Canada for my current job, but chose against it due to a number of reasons specific to my case.

Fortunately they all work for a good company, which probably won't abuse its power over them once they're in the U.S.

>they are above the 90th percentile of pay for that role

The problem with that is that companies will do what they are doing now. Give people titles for lower wage jobs (support, QA etc...) pay them the 90% for the lower wage job, and have them perform the duties of the higher wage job.

That is a problem. I do agree that it doesn't go far enough though. It probably ought to be like $150k for a minimum, and tie that to inflation. Even if that creates a short term supply problem, that'll just incentivize investment in job training and raise wages.

Make it so that if this is the case, the manager goes to prison, the employee gets paid the difference and a green card. Anybody would snitch in that case and the manager knows that.

I agree with everything you are saying. Almost everything about the work visa and employment based immigration needs to be reviewed.

I grew up in the USA (undocumented) and had to leave because I wanted to try to come back legally. Unfortunately, it's not easy even if I can easily get a six figure job or start a business.

> The entire point should be about bringing valuable future citizens in to the country, and the program should definitely be a strong path to citizenship.

For what is worth, not everyone who wants to live and work in the long term in the US wishes to become a US citizen. A lot of us would be happy with an easier path to permanent residence (green card), which would solve the problem of being "able to leave for other employment".

Also, from the point of view of US citizens who favor stricter immigration, it can be argued that simply making it easier for people to become US citizens doesn't solve the (real or perceived) problem of depressed salaries or higher unemployment rate due to the increased labour pool.

> Once within the country, an H-1B worker should also be able to leave for other employment (without the top market rate requirement) whenever they choose and with a 6-12 month grace period for finding new work if they quit or are laid off.

Isn't that just going to lead tata/infosys/whatnot to establish front companies that people then immediately leave and join tata/infosys/whatnot?

How would that work? People agree to take a paper job for $150k and then quit and take the $75k? This seems like pretty easy behavior to both prohibit and enforce.

But I'm not sure why those people wouldn't just go to Google and leave Infosys on the hook for all their initial immigration expenses anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com