Ask HN: Company laid off IT workers but not H1B | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Company laid off IT workers but not H1B

I and several of my coworkers were laid off from our jobs in IT a few weeks ago. We were all told that the layoff was due to the company's financials and was not related to our job performance.

After reading another Ask HN about H1Bs, it occurred to me that there was an H1B worker in our department that was not part of the layoff. It was my understanding that H1Bs were supposed to address talent shortages while still protecting local jobs. If it really had nothing to do with individual performance, was it legal for the company to lay off US citizens while keeping an H1B?

I already signed a severance agreement stating that I would not sue the company for any reason; plus, I have no grudge against the guy who was working under H1B, and would feel bad about doing anything to adversely affect him. So I doubt I have any options in any case. Just curious what you all think.

View on HN

If you believe H-1B's are there to address a "talent shortage" I have a bridge to sell you. Tech companies use them to lower costs and help to suppress the wages of American workers. That said, makecheck is right, in that an employer is sponsoring an H-1B so if they are laid off they may have to essentially be deported. All, in all, I don't blame the people who come here on H-1B's but I really feel that there are enough unemployed, under-employed or under-developed workers here that could fill the jobs if there truly was an interest in doing this.

Also, what they say about "company financials" is probably accurate, American workers usually cost more so, in essence, what they are saying could very well be true. Obviously this raises political issues, etc as do we really want companies operating here that are being propped up only by the lower-cost of people on H-1B's?

Do you have any empirical evidence to support this?

In the H-1B wikipedia article: "Employers must attest that wages offered are at least equal to the actual wage paid by the employer to other workers with similar experience and qualifications for the job in question, or alternatively, pay the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment, whichever is greater"

Well, I have worked with many H-1B workers and while I've never directly known their salary I have always generally gotten the feeling that they are being paid less than their American counterparts in the same positions. Of course I can't prove this as people are generally hush hush about their salary / pay rate anyways so generally its something thats very hard to prove, just a general feeling I suppose from my own experience. Also, with most jobs I've had so far, I was the one who named the rate I was willing to work for (I'm learning this may not be the best idea, but that's something else entirely), at least some of the H-1B workers are probably naming their own rate and it could very well be less than what the average American developer of the same skil-level would name. In this case, they are willing to work for less which is undercutting overall wages in our industry and legally, I don't believe the employer would even be held liable. Anyone who has worked for companies where they employ H-1B people are free to draw their own opinions, I would just say that if you haven't, you shouldn't assume what the government, etc is saying is correct.

That said, if we "opened the floodgates" and let anyone who wanted come here, do you not think that wages would decrease for our (and other) industries? I think its pretty much a fact that it does decrease them to some extent (on average) but the question is really whether its a small amount or an amount that matters.

A talent shortage among U.S. citizens is actually quite feasible in high-tech industries.

Consider the discussions on HN and Slashdot alone recently about salaries and the value of degrees. If people really have been able to pick degrees that are "simpler" than science or engineering and find jobs making six figures in the U.S., it's not hard to imagine that companies might find it hard to hire enough qualified workers for the "harder" disciplines. In a job like software, the difference between an outstanding developer and an average one is orders of magnitude, so it's very unlikely someone else can be trained properly.

Also consider, if there were no visas, companies might not have U.S. offices at all. If you have an office of 500 people, 300 of whom are from other countries, the cost of the U.S. office may be justifiable. But suppose you weren't allowed to have foreign workers live here. The company isn't going to say "okay, looks like we need a big office overseas to hold local talent and a small office in the U.S."; they're more likely to say "screw that, let's put our one and only office overseas", and then you've just lost 200 U.S. jobs completely.

It is a common misconception that the presence of non-U.S. workers will definitely kill U.S. jobs. I can imagine that some companies in some industries may have this issue on a small scale, but they do so illegally.

I agree thats its a complex issue and I definitely am not for having no foreign-born workers, the outstanding ones contribute a lot and I am definitely in support of H-1B programs (or other programs) for entrepreneurs who come here to start a business.

Regarding the degree question, frankly I think this is ridiculous, so an American developer who proven work experience as a developer, without a Bachelor's degree, is automatically ranked lower than an H-1B worker who has a degree from a foreign institution? American employers aren't necessarily going to be aware of the quality / legitimacy of a degree from a foreign institution, hell, for all they know a degree from a college there could be roughly equivalent to a high school degree here, with a few college-level courses thrown in. I don't think I even know of a single person I work with who has a degree in computer science, plenty have degrees in another subject, but is this really making them better developers?

Overall, its a tough issue, I'm all for having some of the best and brightest from other places come here, those who can come here and be a net-positive, but, in my experience there are some who just come because they know its a ticket to a better way of life and they aren't necessarily passionate about what they do and generally don't have what I observe to be a strong work ethic. On the other hand, some do and I have no problem with them being here. Like any cross-section of people, no matter how "perfect" the system for their admission to the U.S. seems to be, it is going to end up with a wide range in skill-sets and therefore I feel it needs to at least be limited and watched closely as undoubtedly they are going to take away some jobs, from some American developers.

I think you misunderstood what I said about degrees. I wasn't comparing degrees from different countries, I was only comparing degrees acquired in the U.S. by U.S. citizens.

Your original point was that there shouldn't be a shortage of talent in the U.S.: that companies should be able to find enough U.S. workers for things like engineering jobs. And I'm saying that there may not actually be enough local talent; it depends on how many U.S. citizens choose the "hard" degree programs that companies want.

There's lots of money to be made by U.S. citizens in certain sectors such as finance. It's conceivable that some U.S. students would opt for an "easier" degree if that still leads to a high-paying job; they may see no point in the extra work of a "hard" program like science or engineering.

Clearly not all U.S. citizens do that, and those that do choose engineering are just as employable, or more so, than immigrant engineers; I never said they weren't.

My point is that the number of people with engineering degrees in the U.S. is not equivalent to the number of qualified, experienced software developers. As many people work in software development who do not hold a computer science-specific degree, a shortage of people obtaining these degrees should not be used to justify importing foreign workers. That is basically the point I am trying to make but its a complex issue and hard to fit into a few comments. Unless a field has a licensing / credentialed program to qualify for employment (from my understanding this is the case in the "hard" engineering fields) then its my opinion that companies should not be allowed to essentially freeze out Americans who do not hold degrees (but have relevant experience) while, at the same time, importing foreign workers who have foreign degrees. If they don't want to hire people without degrees, that is their own decision to make, but they shouldn't get a "bail out" at the same time by using the "degree argument" to justify importing cheaper labor.

Consider this: There are two types of H1Bs in the US. I'm in India, and I have a bunch of friends who went to grad school in the US and were then hired to work at different companies.

The only visa that they get is the H1-B. So, they can't start-up a business of their own, or go work at a start-up. And I'm not sure they're taking American jobs. They get paid the same as US citizens (trust me, they care :)

Then there are the IT chaps who get sent to the US as part of an outsourcing contract. The guys themselves don't get hired — the company they work for (Infosys, TCS etc.) is contracted to do some work and they send a bunch of guys over.

It's called the software services industry and they have positioned themselves as exporters of software in India. In recent times, this has come under some scrutiny, with some sections arguing that they are exporting people and not software. But the projects that they get can be really shitty — maintaining legacy Cobol code and Oracle 1 databases. I don't know if that's work that most Americans will be willing to take.

PS: I have never traveled to the US on an H1B. And I have never worked for any software services company.

EDIT: for typos

I don't know if companies are allowed to let immigration affect their firing decisions. But, in terms of how other human beings are treated, there is a difference for the holder of a temporary visa...

If an H-1B visa holder is laid off or quits, the visa immediately expires. That leaves two main options: almost immediately find another job (at a company willing to spring for a new visa, no less), or leave the United States within a very short period of time. And when the economy is bad, good luck with that first "option"; the replacement job has to be visa-class, it can't just be flipping hamburgers.

A temporary visa doesn't last long (1-3 years), but it's a rotten status to be in if there's a layoff. Imagine: you're living somewhere new, you've made friends, you have possessions, and suddenly in addition to having been fired your life is turned upside down; and if you don't sort it out quickly you'll be given a plane ticket and told never to return.

So while companies probably aren't allowed to consider any of this when choosing who to fire, I wish they would.

A covenant not to sue does not preclude you (as far as I know) from posing the question to the Dept. of Labor (or whatever commission of same handles this particular area).

Be careful, though, of below-the-table blowback. Assess the risks and your interest before continuing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com