US International Students Lose Internships Because of Outdated Work Policies
dailyprincetonian.com
dailyprincetonian.com
1. USCIS has made the OPT process increasingly difficult as yo u can read from this article. However, OPT is the only option if you want to work in the US post graduation. Chances of getting an employer prior to graduation, who can file your H1 in April and wait for you to join in October is close to zero
2. H1 visa is a crapshoot lottery and if you are not a STEM student, you will most likely get one shot at it. If you are not picked, that's the end of it
3. Even if you get selected in H1, 70% of cases result in RFE for BS reasons that a hostile USCIS agent made up on the spot. H1 laws are so vague that a rogue USCIS officer can make up any reason to deny your petition.
4. Even if you get an approved H1 petition, it comes with a ton of strings attached. And if you travel out of the country you have to get a visa from your home country or Canada or Mexico. The visa process also been made extremely difficult, with routine delays and 3-6 months wait in many cases. Imagine being stuck abroad and having to let your employer know that they have to wait months before you can be back.
5. If you are an Indian student currently, the path to green card simply doesn't exist. There is a 100 year wait for a green card
6. Points #1-5 above are not bugs, but features. US education only makes sense for rich students, who want to study for a few years and return. But then, why would you want to study in the US and deal with the harassment in US consulates and embassies to get an F-1 visa or deal with hostile CBP agents who treat you like enemies after flying for 40 hours.
It's not fun, but I don't regret it. I had a super good time in the US, learned a lot, and it opened my mind in many ways. I think if people are interested in spending time in the US, it's worth taking a shot, even with all that immigration struggle.
1.You have an outstanding student loan which you are paying off with a non US salary.
2. You were on a scholarship.
3. Rich.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d...
The public supports maintaining or increasing immigration to this country. This administration does not.
https://www.npr.org/2018/01/23/580037717/what-the-latest-imm...
Americans could be forgiven for having poll whiplash this week.
"Shock poll: Americans want massive cuts to legal immigration," said a headline from the Washington Times.
"Americans broadly embrace the Democratic immigration position," declared a Washington Post headline, with the release of a new ABC/Washington Post poll.
On immigration, as on any other issue, it can seem that there's a poll result that supports just about any position. Here's a look at immigration polls to explain what findings are shaky — and to highlight what can reasonably be concluded about Americans' views on immigration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics
https://fs.blog/2015/11/map-and-territory/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation
https://www.academia.edu/16741004/Modelling_Myth_Vs_Reality_...
https://news.gallup.com/poll/235793/record-high-americans-sa...
Anti-immigration sentiment peaked in 2014.
We should have increased immigration on a merit-based system (obviously college students would be a strong merit).
There was a discussion here on HN on it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9764564
People like me got screwed the most because when we started basing our lives here, there was a 5-7 wait for a green card. It has been a decade since but still no realistic path exists as the wait has grown exponentially.
Well, technically, it does if you're in the O or EB-1 category. But probably over 95% of Indians are not.
Since it has not bee mentioned yet, the priority date for Indians in EB-2 (typically a MS or PhD degree) is June 1, 2009. This means they are currently processing candidates who had cleared their labor certification by June 1, 2009 - over a decade ago.
That date has barely moved in the last decade. I remember it being about 2006 back in 2012. It quickly moved to 2008, and then regressed all the way back to 2003, and then jumped to 2008 again.
I know Indians who started working in 2008. Because of the economic downturn, the company did not apply for their green card (almost guaranteed to get rejected as it's pretty hard to show a shortage in a recession). The company finally applied for them in 2011, so their priority date is 2011. They've been working over a decade, and USCIS is not even close to processing them.
Once you have a priority date, a change in job, or a change in location is not a realistic option. The laws allow you to do it, but then the employer has to redo the labor certification, potentially risking a rejection, or a new priority date.
Things have been bad for Indians since the Obama days. Whatever Trump may have added to it is just noise.
(Edit: Amusingly, the priority date for Indians with only a BS degree (EB-3) is April 2010. They are now ahead of the MS/PhD's in the queue. They usually lagged by several years. Interesting...)
Students from India and China should tread carefully. All this trouble and high tuition fees will land you in financial & immigration trouble.
I want to add that it doesn't make sense at all for funded PhD students, whose advisors draw a lot of funds from the state and federal governments to support them. We're spending a lot of public money educating international students, then forcing that talent and investment out the door when they're done. Why not keep them in the country for a bit to innovate for American companies and pay income taxes?
1. Most of them do not want to stay for a bit but permanently so when asked to leave after x years they will be even more unhappy because now they have settled down, made friends and raising family etc. And I am sympathetic to this argument.
2. Sending immediately back also seems morally right thing to do. While US companies may benefit a bit but 3rd world is in desperate need of well trained experts. Sending those PhDs etc back may be more helpful in getting those countries develop and become self dependent than just aid programmes.
Are you saying Canadian universities operate like airlines ? (overbook & bump)
You can argue that students can go back to their own country and repay the loan? That is practically impossible for almost every student coming from India and China.
No, there's not. That's a hyperbolic projection which requires assuming no one ever leaves the queue (not by giving g up, not by dying, not by no longer being qualified) except by reaching he head and getting a visa.
Obviously, over a 100 year wait time, that's not remotely possible, even as a rough approximation.
Which is not to say the situation isn't miserable for Indian (Chinese, Mexican, and Filipino, too) GC applicants in many categories (not the same ones for each), but it’s not a 100 year long wait.
Reading about how Canada welcomes skilled immigrants, almost brought tears to my eyes. If your English is good and you've studied in Canada (even just a bachelor's degree), you're given a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) upon graduation, and are practically guaranteed to eventually get a Canadian green card via the Canadian Experience Class (Express Entry) program.
For folks outside Canada, good English, education beyond a bachelor's degree, and 3 years of skilled work experience, guarantees you'll have enough points to get a Federal Skilled Worker green card immediately.
I haven't looked at countries besides Canada; but I would strongly recommend Canada over the U.S. for anyone seeking to migrate on the basis of skills.
I would also suggest to consider the Netherlands. The procedure for highly skilled migrants is super simple. Pretty much the only condition is that your employer pays you a sufficient wage.
Unless you want to become a citizen, you'll need to learn Dutch (which is a good thing IMHO but some disagree) and renounce your other citizenship.
Sweden has an even simpler system, if the employer can prove that you are needed (and for most professions reading here that's less than trivial) you are almost guaranteed to get permanent residency in 4 years and become a citizen in 5 years if you want to
The limit to one nationality is maddening, however.
Why do you dislike the one nationality limit?
Because it is deeply arbitrary. Plenty of people can have dual nationalities in the Netherlands, just not me. Even the Dutch Queen has two nationalities. If I married a Dutch person I could become Dutch and have two nationalities, no problem. Hopefully the law will be changed...there has been talk of it.
I'm already eligible to apply for Dutch citizenship...I'm a well-integrated contributing member of society who would love to spend the rest of my life in the Netherlands. I tick all the boxes. I want to be able to vote and have representation (I'm a taxpayer as anyone else, after all). I want to spend the rest of my life here. But it's not limited to the Netherlands...I dearly want to become European. Dutch citizenship would give me the right to live and work anywhere in the EU (and plenty of other EU countries have no issues with people having two nationalities).
I can't give up my US citizenship because of family and other ties. If I needed to return to the US for an extended time (e.g. more than a couple months) to, for example, take care of my aging parents, I would lose everything I've worked towards in the Netherlands. The residence clock would reset and I'd have to find a new highly-skilled job and start all over. Same if I ever wanted to take a (temporary) job in another country. And if you renounce US citizenship, it's hard to ever visit the US again.
Will the kids get an education in English ?
Can the immigrant take part in social activities ?
Can they talk to their doctors or to the grocery store in English without misunderstanding.
How is the attitude towards English ? Will a nationalist government change those English friendliness ?
There are things like these a skilled economic immigrant should consider before immigrating to a non English speaking country.
Take the example of Québec, although it's a province in the English speaking Canada, immigrants who speak only English are not welcomed and frowned upon. They find it hard to get by. They end up moving to other provinces. If the immigrant is not white, the difficulties are 2x in Québec. To be fair, Québec's hate for English is well founded if you examine their colonial history and hence the strict language laws.
No, it's not.
It's largely intended to acheive different social values (particularly community cohesion and undivided loyalties, as opposed to optimizing labor pool to serve capital), which is why the major segment is family unification, but it's not a charity, operating on s need basis (the refugee component is charity-like, sure, but that's not a main component of the immigration system, and the US isn't particularly refugee friendly, even before Trump.)
> But Canada’s hospitable attitude is not innate; it is, rather, the product of very hardheaded government policies. Ever since the mid-1960s, the majority of immigrants to the country (about 65 percent in 2015) have been admitted on purely economic grounds, having been evaluated under a nine-point rubric that ignores their race, religion and ethnicity and instead looks at their age, education, job skills, language ability and other attributes that define their potential contribution to the national work force.
The fact of the matter is that the GOP is often quite dishonest. In public, they say things that often sound very reasonable, and hold positions similar to that of the Democrats/left (points-based immigration, protect pre-existing conditions, retain medicare, etc) -- and it helps them win votes. But as we all know, what they actually do (with executive action, bills introduced in Congress, etc) is often the very opposite of what they say.
I won't be commenting on this topic anymore.
This documentary shows how much Democrats dislike this idea, though in some cases they're willing to accept it in exchange for an amnesty.
Moreover, the system would not replace the existing family ties based system, but been a large number of additional visas on top of the existing allotment. And it would have granted amnesty on a scale never seen in Canada.
The same can be said of the Democrats. All politicians are dishonest; heck, all human beings are dishonest. The degree to which is a matter of opinion. Any reasonably intelligent person should have no problem constructing a narrative that demonstrates genuine dishonesty on behalf of their ideological enemies. An intellectually honest person can easily demonstrate genuine dishonesty on behalf of both sides.
At this point of time it is fair to say it is stronger wish of Indian students to migrate to first world. Whereas first world nations are no longer excited to have more students from outside just because they can pay fees but in return most of them want to settle there. This assumption of first world education will include permanent immigration is no longer valid.
More importantly it also exposes hypocrisy of large majority of students who write idealistic crap in admission essays, benefit from huge privilege in grossly unequal society in India and then try to comfortably settle down in egalitarian first world. It is likely protectionist move by US government but these student whining that 'world is not fair' and that they have legitimate rights to visa and GC reeks of something similar to 'White privilege'.
USCIS (the agency that adjudicates OPT cases) is likely massively overloaded with processing border asylum cases at the moment - and recent media reports suggest they have been roping in employees who would usually work other parts of the immigration system to work asylum cases.
Not providing CPT for internships is probably the worst bureaucracy nightmare for international students. OPT has a high application fee, long turnaround, and takes up time from post-graduation employment. CPT is literally the opposite - I remember stepping into my school's international student office with an offer letter, and 5 minutes later I have my work authorization in hand.
I’d advise any foreign aspirant to avoid the USA for further studies unless they can easily afford tuition. No need to fill university coffers with out-of-state tuition for such degrading treatment.
Do US students have similar opportunities to study at foreign universities as foreign students have to study at US universities?
When comparing universities with similar entrance requirements (e.g. state schools, prestigious private schools, ivy league, etc.) are there a comparable number of US and foreign openings?
How often is instruction in English? (I realize this isn't entirely fair, but the reality is that high quality foreign language training isn't available at many US schools in the same way it is in Europe; which isn't the student's fault).
It seems to me that if the opportunities are not symmetrical then it is reasonable for there to be at least some protection/preference for domestic students. However, I think that needs to be balanced against the benefits of attracting foreign talent and expanding diversity. Either way, my understanding is that the US visa system is largely irrational and broken so it should definitely be reformed.
Often, foreigners pay more than domestic students.
Most countries strictly control employment opportunities for non-citizens, of course.
[1] https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-un...
Also, the flood of illegal aliens and faux-asylum seekers is sucking all of the oxygen out of the room as far as having a rational immigration system goes.
these opt programs should be regulated same way they do H1, or better eliminate them. If you really want these graduates to stay and work in the country, just give them permanent residency from the start. It’s better for everyone.
What else do you expect? They are international students, undergoing the same undergraduate or graduate education as US citizens. There's no reason to expect them, as a whole, to perform differently than other US citizen new grads. I've seen very smart and diligent F1 students, as well as some clearly just coasting along without motivation. Just like for US citizen students.
> but bc they were cheaper
This depends on where you are but in my experience most Silicon Valley companies do not discriminate in terms of compensation based on nationality for new grads.
I think this is backwards - if A is a subset of B, max(A) <= max(B).
The quality of a uni graduate is less about the quality of the uni's teaching and more about the quality of said graduates when they get in, as well as how hard they work while at uni. I would assume, that the average international student who gets into a top university is already better than the average national, due to the higher selection pressure on the former. Also, international students, which in the case of the US, tend to come from a less rich country, are more likely to work hard at uni. They are less satisfied with their financial situation and hence have more to gain.
Having said all that, a lot of lobbying in favour of immigration has the unstated goal of wage depression. It is also not fair to accuse those who are against more immigration of xenophobia or worse. Every political decision has winners and losers and it's easy to be pro-immigration when you profit rather than suffer from it.
-- an immigrant
When I worked at Spotify (NYC office), we had many international engineers (french, spanish, indian, chinese, swedish... etc), that got stuck in the H-1B limbo....
Spotify just moved them into the Stockholm office until/when their H-1B went through.... doing the same work, paying Swedish taxes...
The idea that 'less foreign/international' workers more jobs for US employees is partially false, and has two assumptions that are false:
1. Talent/workforce is not mobile (i.e. the same worker that could have been in the US, can't compete with US labour force outside the country, which is false). In case of Spotify, some of the projects which could have been done in NYC, just got done in Stockholm (and Goteborg) instead.
2. Smart people that coming in the US don't increase the overall economic PIE, but just take form the local workforce, which is false as well. Smart people usually raise up/increase the overall economic PIE.
Sure, there is plenty workplaces (usually bodyshops and second rate employees), that use H-1Bs and OPTs for cheap labour, but most serious companies simply want the best engineers available world wide. The government should help/facilitate the second type of employer. There is many ways the H-1B and (OPTs) can be reformed in order to benefit both the local economy and preventing abusers of the system.
Also, when engaged in a new cold war/trade war with China, the US can't afford to squander its most important asset that it has: The ability to attract the best of the world in this country. If you put barriers for smart people to come in, and your opponent has 4x the number of available talent locally, then you are bound to lose.
While I like the hard stance of Trump with China, the hard stance with smart immigration is just boneheaded and plain stupid....
If you want to do a CPT (internship while your course is ongoing), you can just inform your school and it's fine. But if you want to do it after the course (OPT), you have to apply for an EAD, which adds another 3 months of delay. Why can't the attestation on your I-94 be enough?
It's like the USCIS creates additional paper work for itself so that it can cry about having too much work.
If you have a lower diploma than that and you don't want to study for a higher level in France, you can only stay if you get a job offer among a list of needed jobs in your region (IT-related jobs are needed in almost all regions). There's a lot of red tape, but it's not as difficult as it seems.
Till recently I felt guilty of the fact that every smart person I ever grew up knowing had emmigrated to the States and left India behind, but maybe this is a good thing for India now? Not sure yet.
It's not just H1Bs from India, but nearly all visas from all countries. Events that are supposed to take place in 6 weeks are at 6 months, and it doesn't seem to be documented or reported anywhere. I've only heard about it through some friends going through it or otherwise involved in the processes.
What exactly do you mean by that? Do you have some knowledge to share about Indians specifically having a harder time than others with USCIS recently?
To me it seems reasonable that they determine their own criteria for triggering requests for evidence, but I've not heard about a particular policy or pattern for targeting Indian applicants.
I'm curious because similar claims have been made here in Canada as of recent; but it's hard to tell since we have a quite strict and inquisitive immigration system to begin with.
Trump likes showmanship over substance, though, so he's out. Guessing the new guy will keep the legal system slowdowns in place while upping the fireworks.
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Do you think those words are inscribed on the base of the statue of liberty as a warning to the wealthy? A "keep out!" sign for the hopeful and striving students of the world?
It's more like pledging a fraternity; pay the dues, get shit on, go through the hazing, and eventually you come out the other side assimilated and ready to haze the next incoming pledge class.
We can, and should, be better. I think that starts with not giving up on our ideals so timidly.
Not disagreeing with your post