Hacker News Reader

Comment by cbm-vic-20 | Hacker News Reader

As long as these "techies" are making 10-15% more than their green-carded and citizen peers with equivalent experience and skill, that seems like a win-win.

If they're not making more than green-carded and citizen peers, that's a flaw in the system that should be corrected. The H1-B program is intended to bring in high-skill foreign workers, and the only way to not drive down wages of green-card or citizen workers would be to ensure they cost more to employ. If everyone is playing by the rules, it's a win-win for everyone: companies get positions filled, the foreign worker gets a good wage, and the green-card and citizen worker salaries also rise.

In practice, though, H1-B becomes indentured servitude, since they cannot freely move between companies.

View on HN

> In practice, though, H1-B becomes indentured servitude, since they cannot freely move between companies.

This hasn't been true for at least 10 years (maybe more). It is entirely possible to change jobs on an H-1B. The new company needs to file a new application (called a transfer) for you and premium process it, which adds 2-3 weeks to the process of a job change. Cumbersome? Yes. Indentured servitude? Only if your skills are useful to your company alone.

As of January 2017, H-1B workers are also officially allowed one 60-day period of unemployment, so it's also not true we live in terror of losing our jobs lest we have to pack up and ship out the very next day.

I'm not denying the system could be better still e.g. don't require a new application every time you change your job, unless it's a completely different type of job or less salary, eliminate per-country quotas for green cards because of which hundreds of thousands of Indians and Chinese stick around on H-1Bs for years, allow 60-day periods of unemployment after any job longer than 6 months, or a lifetime 180-day limit. But it is frustrating to hear the amount of misinformation that flies around - the comments section of that article is a cesspool of misunderstanding and fear-mongering.

>It is entirely possible to change jobs on an H-1B.

It is and it's quite easy when your H-1B has not been extended past 6 years. Then it becomes interesting and this is what people colloquially refer as "indentured servitude".

Can you elaborate? It's always been my understanding that the visa can be extended past 6 years in 1-3 year increments if you have an approved I-140. Without losing your "place" in the green card line.

It can be extended if you have an approved I-140 but also if you have a pending I-140. What's going to happen if you switch the job on a pending I-140? And an I-140 could be pending for years in case you are not aware. Even approved I-140 (after 180 days) is not clear cut because the AC21, which allows this, states something to the effect that it's fine if you change to a similar job. How similar? It's up to the USCIS to decide.

> What's going to happen if you switch the job on a pending I-140? And an I-140 could be pending for years in case you are not aware.

The I-140 can be premium processed. How could it be pending for years? Your new employer restarts the PERM process with the priority date from your old application. For Indians and Chinese with multi-decade GC waits it makes no difference if you have to restart because your priority date doesn't change so it's not like you'd get a GC faster by staying with your current employer. For everyone else, you're stuck with your current employer for maybe a year or two until you get a GC.

> Even approved I-140 (after 180 days) is not clear cut because the AC21, which allows this, states something to the effect that it's fine if you change to a similar job. How similar? It's up to the USCIS to decide.

All true and valid points. Hence I said the system could be better. Eliminating per-country GC caps seems like the most expedient solution.

>The I-140 can be premium processed. How could it be pending for years?

"Premium processing" just means that your premium fee is refunded if the application is not approved in the short time. It can totally go for any period of time imaginable even without lawyers filing it in such a way as to ensure a couple of RFEs.

>Your new employer restarts the PERM process with the priority date from your old application.

Meanwhile you are on a 1 year H1B extension, which cannot be extended until you have a new pending I140. Which, in turn (if memory serves) requires 1 year and 1 day left in status to file (though there are probably ways around it too).

> Hence I said the system could be better.

I am not arguing that system could not be better, I am arguing against "mythbusting" of ease of switching jobs on H1B. It's easy on a fresh H1B but it's very complicated later and this is the reason people don't often do that on >6 years H1B (practically with 5+ years you are already running into the issues with I140).

> In practice, though, H1-B becomes indentured servitude, since they cannot freely move between companies.

You can change company while on the H1B. Yes, there is some paperwork, but in practice, everyone who is in the USA on the H1B can easily change the company pretty quickly at any point in time without leaving the country.

Funilly, as Trumpists keep attacking the H1B, people who didn't get the H1B switch to the L1 and THAT doesn't let you move between companies.

Switching to L1 is a weird dance. You have to leave for a year and then you come back on a visa that has no cap and no real employee protections.

I was in a group of people that didn't get the H1B in the lottery for a big tech company.

Most of us went to work in the European office. Later, about 30-50% of those people went to USA on L1, much closer to "indentured servitude" than H1B.

Did anyone win in this situation? In this particular scenario, limiting the H1B actually decreased American workers job security.

> In practice, though, H1-B becomes indentured servitude, since they cannot freely move between companies.

Not true. An H1-B can change job. I did it a number of times without any problem. In addition, good companies do not take advantage of this so called immobility. Netflix certainly does not. Its CEO used to say money shouldn't be an issue to employees, and he certainly means it. In fact, Netflix's culture is so good to ICs, but I digressed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com