The current system is in place only because all of the US companies that benefit from cheap labor provided by the likes of Infosys have lobbied for it.
H-1B applications must pass the prevailing wage test, i.e. applicants cannot earn less than the prevailing wage for their position at the chosen employment location.
Companies like Tata, Infosys, WiPro, etc. need to maintain a part of their workforce in the US for certain projects anyway, so they slave away these applicants with draconian contracts. It's not that they pay them significantly less than any other, but the fact that they can guarantee a 3 to 5 year headcount for their larger US based projects, with a larger talent pool to choose from, if needed.
This is why a lot of people, like me, favor high levels of general immigration but don't support targeted visas like the H1B. I'm especially opposed to visas that are controlled by the employer and restrict the personal and economic freedom and mobility of immigrant workers in the US. If employers are lobbying for visas that allow someone to work in the US only on the condition that they remain in a specific role at a specific company at a specific salary, that should raise all kinds of red flags. You're allowed to be a software developer in the valley, but you'll be deported if you try to open a small business or enter a different profession or even change employers without new "sponsorship"? I find it remarkable that so many people don't see the egregious problem here.
https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=&job=software+developer&ci...
The prevailing wage test fails to account for stock and bonuses and is basically a joke.