Hacker News Reader

As a baseline, I'm in favor of a lot of immigration and think people have way too many hoops to jump through in general, but the H1B crowd in particular is a group that matches even what most of those opposed to mass immigration claim to desire in immigrants.

That said, i've noticed different "worlds" of H1B worlds, with different impacts upon other workers.

I did a govt job on the US East Coast (Richmond, VA) that had a lot of H1B contract workers, likely from one of these body shops. They were good people, and adequate if unimpressive coders. They were earning decent US wages and were painfully aware that losing or leaving a job left them no guarantee there'd be another for them in the US soon. Management abused the heck out of these people, establishing practices, expectations, and treatment of coders that were terrible. They put up with it, but but it lowered the quality of the workplace for everyone, and the employees and US citizens (naturalized or born) working there also suffered, and tended to leave when they could. I was one of them, which put me in Seattle on the West Coast...

...Where I found an entirely different world of H1B workers. These were not contractors, not through a body shop, and were definitely impressive in their fields (devs, architects, and QA/Test eng, along with a handful of PMs and Team Leads). Here there was no reduction of workplace quality - these workers had lots of extra annoyances I didn't have to worry about (example: apparently changing your job title during one period of time when applying for a green card restarts the multi-year process, so I knew of people that declined or postponed promotions!) but they could definitely find work elsewhere easily enough - should workplace be unbearable they'd bounce like the rest of us could.

Whenever the H1-B debate comes up, I reflect on the different impact the workers had on these offices, and the impact the H1-B rules had on those workers. Everytime one of my friends debated if it was worth pursuing a green card or naturalization, I saw the seeming idiotic result of the US chasing away workers that it said it needed, that had proven themselves, and that american companies had spent time and money in training and getting experience to.

I don't even understand the point of H-1B being tied to a specific employer or job title.

It's to prevent a bait-and-switch on behalf of the employee and situations where a person is "employed" by a company only so they can immigrate and then do something else, on behalf of the employer.

We can easily let people switch job titles and employers while addressing potential loopholes though.

I imagine it's to deter a certain kind of exploit. Hiring Quantum Rocket Surgeons and a week later they're Surface Hygiene Associates being paid much much less. Or vice-versa.

I think the idea is that the H1B isnt a general 'work visa', it is given because there is a position at a company for a worker with a specific skillset. So it makes sense in that framework. I'm not arguing that this is the right way, just what the reason probably is.

You have to see how laws are made in the US. They are written by lobbyists/corporate lawyers (the lawmakers have stopped pretending otherwise these days). For the company, it totally makes sense. They spent something upfront (H-1B fees and uncertainties are non-trivial), so they want a guarantee that this person cannot change jobs easily. That the lock-in is for 6-years is just pure power-play.

The declared intended purpose of H-1B is not for the benefit of the worker but for the benefit of US economy - the visa is intended so that the US employer can fill that particular job position that requires special skills.

If that position ceases to exist or gets filled by a local worker, then the visa loses its purpose, the employee apparently isn't needed anymore by US and can be discarded.

The 'root cause' problem in the 1st case is the leverage the employee has over the person. The workers are just trying to better their lot in life, like many of our own ancestors who came to the US. I don't hold any illusions that whoever it was that came over from Ireland in my family was some kind of exceptional talent. Probably just an ordinary person willing to take some risks and work hard.

Exactly.

The first group are basically being exploited by a body shop that puts in 10X the number of applications vs spots that they need, but always still gets lots of awards. They then are able to leverage the fact they flooded the pool to carry out visa arbitrage - they have something employees want, and leverage that, even though that things is really public government property (visa) and so shouldn't be a privately leveraged.

Almost all the H1B horror stories are from these shops (often they have related outsource arms) - "I had to train my replacement and they sent my job overseas using H1B visas". You can see how trump got elected when dems were defending this as good for US workers.

The second group are folks who really really need employees. They are and will hire absolutely any US worker who meets their criteria (it's a lot easier - fewer hoops to jump through) and are willing to hire an H1B eligible employee if they run out of pipeline on US based folks. These tend to be truly higher skill jobs. The US is taking the cream of other countries investments in education etc etc with the folks - I can't imagine this is bad for the US in any way.

What is frustrating from one perspective though is that the reactionary defense of H1B means that lots of group 1 are still allowed to play their games. Seriously, crack down big time on group one. Keep same number of folks coming, and loosen up on group 2 - Level 2+ wages, masters degree US should be first in line.

Very simple to fix - ban H1B for contracted staff. I.e. each recipient works for his org and only for this org. None of this 3rd party placement crap.

The simple solution is to give every h1b worker a temporary green card or somehow allow them free mobility of work within the United states. Being allowed to move jobs at will, vs being beholden to the hiring companies for sponsorship, will quickly kill these body shops and also let us know if tech firms really are being honest about a shortage of skilled engineers.

Would never happen.

Too many people benefit from having a slave that can't leave their job without getting deported.

> shortage of skilled engineers

...at peanut pricing.

exactly. It makes too much sense. Which is why it needs to happen, Canada has a skilled worker program and they give you a green card when you arrive. America doesn't need a visa designation in my opinion, just copy the skilled worker designation from Canada and you're there.

I think that you would still want some restrictions like they have to work in the same industry for at least e.g. 80% of the total comp of their first job in the US until they get a real green card. Otherwise there are different abuse patterns that could happen.

I don't think this solution makes sense. I agree that , from an ethical standpoint, there should to be better protections for H1B holders. But giving everyone free reign to change jobs is also ripe for abusing the system and possibly flooding the market without a general way to gauge need for that particular H1B applicant's skillset.

Currently, the process is that you need to find a company that is willing to sponsor you, then that company needs to file paperwork with the government to explain the wages, job description, etc. And then this application is either accepted or rejected based on whatever guidelines they use[1].

If we keep this situation and start allow workers to move around wherever they want, the company just ate the paperwork legal costs and the role they hired for might not even stay filled for long, prompting them to redo the process.

[1] https://www.immi-usa.com/h1b-application-process-step-by-ste...

> the company just ate the paperwork legal costs and the role they hired for might not even stay filled for long,

Would you expect a company to be able to retain US citizen employees if it underpaid or gave boring work?

Switching jobs is a stressful, non-trivial process. Most people who are happy with their job don't want to change it. If the company can't retain an employee on the merits of its own offerings and compensation, that's too bad.

There should be only one parameter that governs the eligibility to specialist visas: the ability to earn a high wage. Companies should bid directly with the salary, and the top X offers get a Visa; the candidate is free to change jobs but is required to maintain within that wage band for the duration of the visa, outside exceptional situations.

Any other mechanism affords the opportunity for arbitrage, bureaucracy, legal leeches specialized in exploiting the process etc.

What's awesome about this approach is that it naturally leads to max revenue for the government as well.

The only counter I've heard to it is that Joe's Tech Corp in Podunk, USA cannot compete with big city salaries and would never be able to get any filled. Though I see that as a feature not a bug.

Why would that be a feature not a bug? The Amazons, Googles, and Goldman Sachs of the US aren't the only companies that need talent.

And even if they were, Google and Amazon (maybe Goldman Sachs too) have talent spread out across the country, even in what is dismissively called flyover country. Certainly these locations aren't their main wells of talent but they're still important to the companies.

Not all tech workers are created equal and not all companies need tech rock stars. Joe's Tech Corp would be priced out of the H1B market but could still compete for talent in the citizen pool. Different talent levels come with different compensation requirements.

I'm trying to come up with the most charitable interpretation of your last sentence but am failing. Was it meant as a "let them eat cake" statement for not being a coastal dweller? Given the many negative effects tech centers are having on local populations, deconcentrating tech across the country seems like it would have positive benefits for many not in the tech industry, which is most people.

Money is how we as a society have chosen to decide how resources are allocated. Why would we decide to be 'socialist' here and say use a lottery or some other stupid way?

I'm totally amazed how often the US come up with ways for the rich to have the benefits of socialism and the or to have the consequences of capitalism.

> Why would we decide to be 'socialist' here and say use a lottery or some other stupid way?

we already run an immigration lottery

https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/diversity-visa

You could give small rural areas a boost by using some sort of formula based on percent Average annual income in the largest metro area in 150mile radius. But the idea is largely good and too fair to implement by any lobbying group

The less developed and unsafe the applicant's home country is, the less just the H1B model is. H1B employees are worked like animals under the threat of being sent back or replaced and losing their visa. It's an awful system in general. If we want skilled workers, they should be given a green card and the ability to find work wherever they want and quit whenever they want. Holding their visa over their head via their job is evil.

> c) allow all employers one applicant before awarding more slots, so the body shop mills have to compete with small business who have real jobs for real people and are not just playing percentage games (100K applications with 5k actual jobs available).

Won't that just mean the body shops create 100K subsidiaries?

Probably. Another approach would be to cap the percentage of H1B employees you have.

That sounds effective. Would probably impact more legitimate attempts, though (single-owner business really needs someone with a really obscure skill, etc).

You're not a huge fan of mass immigration if you're not a huge fan of mediocre immigrants.

I'm not just saying this to be facetious. There's a huge pressure on members of any marginalized group (women, immigrants, LGBTQ) to either be extraordinary or not matter at all. You have to make space for the people that aren't extraordinary.

I'm speaking as someone from a marginalized group. I've dealt with this pressure myself.

But are there US citizens or permanent residents who are interested in the jobs your H1B's are vying for? It is a tight labor market, so it's possible there aren't many other candidates, depending on the job.

However I recently saw an opening where I work go to an H1B where there were other qualified candidates, which I don't like to see. I would rather see the H1B's have a more stable/easier path to permanent residency. Not only does it confer a longer term economic benefit to the US to have more skilled workers, it would (probably) make the worker feel more secure and stable in their life, and less beholden to stay somewhere working because their H1B status is being held over their head and preventing easy mobility.

It isn't about interest, but who is best for the job. That's the point of classifying a specialty occupation. Candidates aren't interchangeable. A PhD grad from India with a specialized degree could add a TON of more value to the business and economy than a US citizen, so why not hire them?

Ugh, these cases give H1B's a bad name. I do wish there was crackdown on crap like this.

Unless I misread the article, this looks like a crackdown to me. It's a BA level QA analyst job at an outsourcing shop.

There is no doubt that H1B gets abused by these small contracting shops and Indian giants like Infosys. I am all for stricter criteria for H1B but at the same time if it comes without a path for permanent residency then its not lucrative enough for an immigrant. Most H1B people I know are genuine hard working tax paying good people. They like it here and want to make it their home while contributing to the economy so why not remove the hoops they jump through.

> They should SHUT DOWN these other players who clog up the process.

Or we could focus on making the process uncloggable and work towards the free movement of labor which could add $78T to the global GDP.

https://www.economist.com/the-world-if/2017/07/13/a-world-of...

How evenly would that $78 billion be distributed. Would some countries or groups end up as net losers?

Countries all around the world make policies to prevent their brighest and entrepreneurial minds from leaving to another countries.

Immigration restriction is the process by the which you refuse the gift from another country. It is doing to yourself what your competitors are trying to inflict on you.

> outsourcing firms that are just numbers game body shop mills.

When there is a 6+ months wait from applying for H1-B for getting it approved or rejected, the very top candidates nor the fastest growing companies may not want to wait that long. So H1-B is by nature more appealing to companies who can play the numbers game.

>Where I work the H1B applicants (who don't get selected) have masters, from a US university, for a degree that applies specifically to their job. These folks should be on the red carpet to US citizenship. They have checked every box.

Job specific degrees are always a boon-doggle and they really shouldn't be getting the jobs their degrees proclaim. School is the time for theory, but these Job-specific degree programs these days are just glorified bootcamps

> b) set a minimum comp for the jobs that is reasonable.

Indeed. What the H1-B program should look is for workers paying taxes. I'd grant them from top to bottom until equilibrium. Except for a very small set of specific professions needed and still not making it (perhaps healthcare or education). US doesn't need QA analysts or consultants.

Note: I'm not from US.