Second, not all industry has high profit margins like software. Places like biotech or semiconductor can't afford 250K for a single worker, no matter how senior they are except in special circumstances. And these fields are just as critical and important as coding. In fact, one may argue that healthcare and chipmaking capacity are more critical to the country than someone writing the next iteration of Microsoft Word.
Third, if H1B is given based purely on salary, then company won't bother with H1B anymore. Imagine what happen if suddenly half the company on market no longer care about having a H1B program. Some politician will start trying to abolish it all together. Xenophobia and "they took our high paying jobs" and "those snobs foreigners get paid how much while American get paid how much?" are easy to sell.
Just a terrible hot take. Try to think broader than just your situation.
Companies that hire H1B's often 'downrank' employees to roles they are overqualified for in order to reduce salary requirements.
>Second, not all industry has high profit margins like software. Places like biotech or semiconductor can't afford 250K for a single worker,
If the industry cannot afford it, perhaps they shouldn't hire H1bs? How else, other than compensation, would you decide who provides the most economic value?
>Third, if H1B is given based purely on salary, then company won't bother with H1B anymore. Imagine what happen if suddenly half the company on market no longer care about having a H1B program.
A country's laws exist for the benefit of it's CITIZENS. I personally believe that the US H1B program is exploitative and should be ended, and our legal immigration system should be reformed. You need a worker? They get a green card, and can go to any company they please. That worker should also be automatically eligible for citizenship after ~ 5 years of paying taxes and staying out of trouble.
As it is - because most employees in SFBA are H1B - we all have to suffer shit working conditions with toxic management.
How do you define economic value? By money only is a bad metric. Take pharma for example. The top 5 biggest pharma companies combined can't equal the same market cap or liquidity of 1 Apple (1.9T vs 2.5T). Now think about the societal impact. If you have to live in a place without drugs (those 5 pharma produce almost all the lifesaving drugs in the US) and a place without Apple products, where would you go?
I can go into the reasons why Apple is 2.5T and the pharmas is fraction of that, but that would be too long. It is simply the economy of scale, cost of manufacturing, and legal regulations. The cost of doing business results in lower salary for the end workers but it doesn't mean the industry is "lower value".
More broadly, I disagree with our entire legal immigration system. It would be far better for us to have a points based system like Canada to bring in the very best and brightest and quickly integrate them into our system. Until then, I stand in pretty firm opposition to the H1B as it stands today.
Why should a software dev in SF being paid 150k$ be considered as good a candidate compared to one being paid 400k$? Why do you call it a "high-skilled" visa, and then argue for the bar to be "average"
> Second, not all industry has high profit margins like software
If they cannot pay enough, maybe they should not be hiring international workers citing a shortage.
> Third, if H1B is given based purely on salary, then company won't bother with H1B anymore.
So, is there no shortage of tech workers? Certainly international MIT PhDs will still be in demand?
Please read what I wrote. They are required by law to pay above average salary for the occupation they are hiring. Not all industry has the profitability of big tech. Unless you are arguing a software dev job is somehow more skilled than a semiconductor engineer or a biopharma scientist, you have no argument here.
And which visa they are going to be hired for? EB visa? Which take 2-3 years to vet? Which company will wait a year to fill a position instead of just scaling down? If you take down the H1B, there will be shortages and reduced productivity. If you need proof, just check how many of your coworkers are on H1B.
Also, just do a google search, "high-skilled professional visas" without doubt refer to H1B
> Unless you are arguing a software dev job is somehow more skilled than a semiconductor engineer or a biopharma scientist, you have no argument here.
Maybe they should be paid better. Also, I argue that being a nanny or a janitor requires skill too, much more in fact than writing a dumb CRUD app. If software industry having high margins is the problem, maybe that is a separate problem solved with anti trust actions.
> And which visa they are going to be hired for? EB visa? Which take 2-3 years to vet? Which company will wait a year to fill a position instead of just scaling down? If you take down the H1B, there will be shortages and reduced productivity. If you need proof, just check how many of your coworkers are on H1B.
As someone on H1B seeing rampant "fraud" and a mere 14% approval rate, seeing friends with PhDs not getting lotteries while people with fake job offers by "consultancies" get it, I am not asking to end the H1B. I am asking it to be actually for "high skilled" labor.
For you to qualify to perform services in a specialty occupation you must meet one of the following criteria:
Hold a U.S. bachelor’s or higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or university Hold a foreign degree that is the equivalent to a U.S. bachelor’s or higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or university
But I understand if you call a janitor a "skilled" job then a bachelor degree is indeed "high skilled" from your point of view. Regardless, I do not think anywhere is hiring H1B to do janitor work. An engineer or a scientist with just a bachelor degree is never "high skilled" in my field of work.
>Maybe they should be paid better.
The reasons a semiconductor engineer or a biotech scientist don't get paid higher has nothing to do with how big the company they are in. The nature of software means it is inherently more profitable (low manufacturing cost, less legal regulations, more location flexibility, etc). Those result in the workers get paid more of the profit share. A biotech company with 200M funding and 5 years is barely enough to test 1 pharma product just to have the FDA deny it in the 6th year. You can get 5 guys in a garage to churn out a multimillion dollar software product in 6 months. It is not comparable.
My whole argument is this: Granting visa based on salary is a bad take and unfairly prioritize one type of industry over everything else.
* NVidia: $10B in net income 2022. Gross margins 70%. CEO comp $22m
* J&J: $18B in net income 2022. Gross margins 68%. CEO comp $13m
* Pfizer: $31B in net income 2022. Gross margins 75% CEO comp $30m
* Qualcom: $13b in net income 2022. Gross margins 55%. CEO comp $5m
* TI: $9b in net income 2022. Gross margins 65%. CEO comp $22m
Also H1Bs are being paid above market rates. That isn't true. The data is searchable. Look at Tata for a software developer in Austin. I see 20+ developers making less the $80k(Average according to glassdoor) with most making in the $60k range which i would argue is below entry level.
https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=tata+consultancy+services+...
Edit(for comparison):
* Apple: Gross Margins 44%
* MSFT: Gross Margins: 70%
* Googl: Gross Margins 57%
Gross margin is a bad metrics. It doesn't cover overhead costs or R&D. Take for example J&J whose net profit margin is 13% while Apple is 24%. Or abbvie is also 13% vs Msft 34%.
Also why did you not put in the net income for those big 3 tech companies in the bottom?
https://www.investopedia.com/news/h1b-visa-issue-explained-m...
Because non-tech companies pay lobbyists, too.
Politely, society disagrees with your views on what contributes (see: the high salaries).
Then there is the question of externalities. People working in fields with positive externalities tend to be underpaid, if there are no sufficient mechanisms that allow their employers to capture the value they create. Similarly, people working in fields with negative externalities tend to be overpaid.
Mexicans just don't do software.
Why is US so complicated for no reason? It’s not like it even makes a difference in the end, it’s just needless friction .
There is political disagreement over what a new system should look like so there has never been enough agreement to completely overhaul the rules.
As per [2]: "USCIS announced that the agency received a total of 308,613 H-1B cap registrations, of which USCIS issued 87,500 registration selections in March 2021."
If the EU system was as oversubscribed as the US it would have the same problems.
1. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
2. https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/uscis-rel...
Then again, total amount of immigration permits per year is 7 in US vs 2.5 for the whole EU, so maybe you have a point.
1. https://ind.nl/en/about-us/statistics-and-publications/the-i...
"Change of employer or job The residence permit is valid as long as you meet the requirements. This can also be the case if you change employers or job. If you no longer work for your employer, or change jobs as a result of which you no longer meet the rules for which the residence permit was issued, then your employer must notify the IND of this. If you have found another job as a highly skilled migrant, your new employer must notify the IND of this within 4 weeks. The IND will then check if the requirements are still met."
Also this has much more requirements on issue than you described and the 30K number likely includes the changes described above, as well as extensions.
Which one did I miss?