Spouses of Some H-1B Visa Holders to Be Allowed to Work
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
If a spouse is in Us for 6 years on H4, she is essentially sitting ducks all those years not doing anything. No one will employ such a person. You cant even run a blog and earn through ad-sense on H4. Neither can you work remotely for a foreign company.
It is beyond me why such law exists in first place. People from Mexico can jump over the fence come to US and work while the president goes out of his way to ensure that these people can get US taxpayer's money but my wife who is engineering graduate with over 8 years of experience working for American companies in India can not work in US because it takes away jobs of American people!
You just answered your own question. The people "jumping the fence" (as you put it) are often taking low-paying (even below minimum wage) jobs that US citizens don't want, so it's less problematic politically[0].
On the other hand, there are a lot of citizens who would love whatever job your wife would get with 8 years of engineering experience, so it's more politically challenging to give that job to a non-citizen, even if she is undeniably qualified for it.
[0] In fact, some industries rely on illegal immigrants and/or illegal migrant workers as sources of labor below minimum wage (see: agriculture[1]), so they have an incentive to enable this practice (or at least turn a blind eye), since they can't rely on the legal resources to provide them labor at that price.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reefer_Madness_%282003_book%29 (Don't be fooled by the title - the chapter I'm referring to is about production of strawberries).
- Their intent doesnt seem to be providing Spouses with opportunity to work, but instead prevent dropouts of those people who get fed up of the process and either go back home or apply for Canada PR. I know few such people myself
- Important point: During the 4-6 years when the spouse cannot legally work, either they have given up on their career or have already signed up for a graduate program in order to get an F1. It is basically useless to offer jobs to someone after 6 years of being jobless and they have very very less competitive advantage unless they have a made a productive use of time by doing stuff such as freelancing and pro-bono work.
- Dependents of L1 visa (L2) are allowed to work on EAD, I dont understand why it is so complex for H4's.
- Another effect of this would also mean that the govt might not consider increasing the CAP for H1B next year, but rather try to retain the exising H1B's and try to get their green card done.
So, although this change seems optimistic, it isnt that helpful (I myself was very excited after I first saw this)
Regarding the L2s being able to get their EADs but not the H4s, keep in mind that the latter are not the only ones in this situation, it's the same thing with TN/TD. And then you have the E-3 spouses (Australia) who _can_ get their EADs[2] :)
I think that the problem is that each visa/work status was created separately, so it's more than just a case of "since it works for this one, why doesn't it work for this other one". I agree with you that this current situation is ridiculous but I'm happy that they start addressing those issues, even if piece by piece.
1. http://recode.net/2014/05/06/congrats-h-1b-spouses-you-can-g... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-3_visa
The way I see it, in the best case scenario a spouse can now get an EAD in 2 years (1 year before starting the GC process, 1 year to get the PERM and the I-140). Still far from being able to work right away, but progress nevertheless.
An efficient marriage strategy considering this proposal would be to get married after you are ~4-5 years into your H1B, and marry somewith with a STEM background. Now those would be very stringent marriage norms :)
Just curious, can someone apply for permanent residency in Canada without being there in the first place? If that's how it works I'll definitely consider that option.
> unless they have a made a productive use of time by doing stuff such as freelancing
H-4s cannot freelance. My wife is on H-4 and we felt quite disgruntled when our immigration attorney told us that. Basically, she can only do volunteer work. She cannot have income from any kind of work.
IANAL, but I think it is legal to work for a foreign company from US, as long as the company is in no way associated or affiliated to US. Someone please correct me if wrong.
And then I put my foil hat on, and the voices tell me that the H-1B program must not be for the benefit of the public, and that both the American workers and the foreigners with visas are being exploited for the benefit of the corporate sponsors.
The only benefit I see here to essentially doubling the number of available guest workers under H-1B is that the affected spouses are free to change employers and to quit from unsuitable employment without being deported. That makes them better off than the person that actually has the sponsorship!
If 10 years from now a pool of qualified US workers becomes available, the H1-B approval would need to be repeated, the labor certification would fail and the immigrant would not be allowed to fill the role.
I'm certainly not saying it's the best way to handle it, but that's the logic behind the current rules.
Otherwise, you are finding a different person to fill the role in ten years, and that person will be competing with someone in a foreign country that has 10 more years of experience.
[edit: wrong usage of 'immigrants', changed to 'nonimmigrant']
If a citizen starts working at 18, gets laid off at 32 and doesn't find another job until 34, that's much cheaper than a non-immigrant who comes to the US at 32 and ending up on unemployment at 34 for 2 years before going back home.
Besides that, the flip side of your argument is that protectionism is the only force keeping poor people from becoming rich. Economics is not a zero-sum game. It is far more complex than you portray.
H1B's have to go though long process of LCA's, ads in the newpapers, notices etc before their visa is approved. Would H4's have to go though this also? If not I can see this being abused by offshoring companies as loophole in the system.
I don't see how this is 'first step' towards a better immigration policy. Current H1B system is not used in the way it is intended for the most part. Its modern day serfdom used to attract desperate educated people from poor countries. Why not give them green cards and let them actually take advantage of american system and create jobs instead of treating them like 2nd class citizens with no rights, no voice, no dreams.
it's dictated by the gov: http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/law-and-policy...
How is that clear, exactly? The empirical evidence shows the exact opposite. You can start reading here: http://nber.org/papers/w19315
The only way this disastrous situation will get fixed is with a year zero restart. The current set of interest groups are too entrenched for meaningful policy change. We need a period of zero immigration for five or ten years, after which other policies might be worth considering.
There most probably wouldn't be a need for any stricter policy after 10 years, for skill based employment. By that time, many companies would either move or have big offices in other locations in order to attract global talent so the US wouldn't be as attractive to come in anymore. Also, there are a lot of companies that are started by immigrants, so some other country is suddenly going to be a hub just like Silicon Valley now.
Looks like your proposal affects students too. That means a lot of folks like the Google and Yahoo founders. Do you even realize how much R&D at universities and companies is driven by immigrants?
Don't think it will happen? What if I tell you it's already happening to a certain extent even with the current policies?
http://www.infoworld.com/t/business/microsoft-vancouver-resp...
You don't think this is going to hurt employment in the US? If India open up immigration in response and Bangalore becomes a bigger startup hub than Silicon Valley, you don't think that hurts US workers? If US workers move out too, it's just brain drain that hurts the country.
There are a lot of synergies that come together to make technology hubs.
>Really, this would better serve both the foreign countries and American global interests.
How would large tech companies' IT workforces being international help American global interests? Imagine if other countries had access to all your internet searches and email.
But even if I'm wrong, I don't really care. The high skill tech stuff people on here fixate on is not relevant in the bigger employment picture.
Go on back to consuming, now.
The one qualification for immigration should be this: will the country be better with this person in it? Does the person have a net positive value to society?
Thanks to technological progress, that is not a difficult bar to pass. The problem is entirely with American politicians that use immigration as a wedge issue. They blame immigration for any weaknesses in the economy, when in reality, they are the ones sucking value out of the economy, pocketing some, and burning the rest on a pyre.
People who come to your town wanting to work for their living are not your enemy. They are the ones multiplying your trade opportunities and business potential. No one is taking your job. Those jobs belong to the company. If you want to own a job, you have to own your own business. And if you can't do that, it is the people setting up tollbooths and roadblocks between you and business ownership that are ultimately at fault. Look hard at them. They are not immigrants.
Even if you are getting your H1B this October, and assuming that you could qualify for EB-2 in ROW and that your company starts the green card process the day you start working (more likely it's gonna take 6 months to a year), your wife still won't be able to work for another 2 years. Just getting the PERM these days can easily take a year.
Also IANAL.
(I'm guessing because O-1 visas are not dual-intent.)
In any case, certainly a step in the right direction.
Source:
8 C.F.R. 214.2(o) (13) “Effect of approval of a permanent labor certification or filing of a preference petition on O classification. The approval of a permanent labor certification or the filing of a preference petition for an alien shall not be a basis for denying an O–1 petition, a request to extend such a petition, or the alien's application for admission, change of status, or extension of stay. The alien may legitimately come to the United States for a temporary period as an O–1 nonimmigrant and depart voluntarily at the end of his or her authorized stay and, at the same time, lawfully seek to become a permanent resident of the United States.”
For entrepreneurs this is the most exciting development in these proposals as it should make the path to getting a green card easier.
"Eligible individuals would include H-4 dependent spouses of principal H-1B workers who:
Are the beneficiaries of an approved Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; or Have been granted an extension of their authorized period of stay in the United States under the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21) as amended by the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. AC21 permits H-1B workers seeking lawful permanent residence to work and remain in the United States beyond the six-year limit."
[1] http://www.dhs.gov/news/2014/05/06/dhs-announces-proposals-a...
>"Spouses of H-1B visa holders being sponsored for a green card by their employers will be allowed to work in the U.S."
If you are "being" sponsored, this means you are "in the process", not after you got the green card. As much as I know, a company can sponsor H1-B holders right from the start of their contract (although, probably not all of them do so) for getting a green card.
Either this statement from the original post is wrong, OR the interpretation in the house.gov is wrong, OR I'm missing something (probably & most-likely).
Does anyone have a clear answer?
Step 1) Company sponsors H1b Step 2) Employee works at the company for say like a year Step 3) Company starts the green card process and files labor. Step 4) Labor is approved and employee receives a priority date. Step 5) Company applies for i-140 . Step 6) i-140 is approved and priority date is now set. Step 7) Employee keeps on renewing H1b until priority date becomes current. Step 8) When priority date becomes current, employee along with its dependents can apply for i-485 Adjustment of status. Step 9) Employee and its dependents received EAD cards and Advance payroll ( for traveling purpose. Step 10) USCIS starts processing i-485 applications (each dependent gets its own application) and starts adjucating them. Step 11) USCIS asks for Visa number once adjucation is done. Each dependent needs its own visa number. Step 12) If visa number is available when its requested green card is issue, else application remains pending until visa numbers become available.
Now, the above mentioned rule will allow spouses to obtain work authorization from Step 6. Previously, they had to wait till Step 8 to obtain it.
A detail people might miss is that some of those steps take forever, yet tend to have an extremely high success rate. For instance, I was hit by one of those times where priority dates moved back, so I spent about 4 years with my status being 'Applicant for adjustment of status'. I was not going to get denied, but I couldn't get approved either.
If, through magic, there were no limits on visa numbers, the only thing that would stop about a million people to be given a green card overnight is manpower. They all qualify. They all are living in the US, and probably will continue doing so forever barring something terrible happening to their companies, but they are not officially permanent residents.
This also slows down citizenship too. You can apply for it after 5 years as a permanent resident. I've been living in the US, legally and without interruptions, since 1997, but I won't have my five years of permanent residency until 2017.
For the first issue of spouses not able to work, I've heard several horror stories where spouse has medical or engineering degree but is forced to sit at home doing nothing. The situation, as I recall, wasn't too bad however because such spouses eventually went on to get F1 visa for studies or H1B themselves so they can work. However path to that was extraordinarily tedious littered with lots of legal issues.
I really like UK's work permit system comparatively. It allows to work anywhere in UK once you get permit and avoids employer exploitation. It automatically grants spauces also permission to work. In addition, if you live in UK on work permit for 4 years with paying taxes then you are automatically eligible for permanent residence. As sad it is, UK has taken much more freedom oriented approach for immigrants than US for years.
1. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230341710...
This is so tiresome. All so a bunch of companies can import wage slaves to depress tech salaries.
In short, this rule allows spouses of H1B holders to work, provided the H1B holder has an approved I-140 or has their H1B extended beyond 6 year limit under AC21. Notice that this rule is very specific and does not cover all H1B holders.
[1]http://www.dhs.gov/news/2014/05/06/dhs-announces-proposals-a... [2]http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=20131...
EDIT: Grammer
Lot of people seem to miss this important point.
On the other hand, I don't think it should be permitted to post articles here that are behind a paywall. That's just my opinion though.
The problem with H-1Bs is the vast majority of them are abusing the system. I've seen it firsthand working at one of the top four global immigration law firms. Most H-1Bs are gaming the system. They lie about their title, experience, and work location to get a lower prevailing wage. For example, they say they are going to work in Iowa and then work in Boston and on and on. Most (over 80%) of the H-1s go to outsourcing companies like Cognizant, Tata (TCS), Infosys, Symphony etc. Their entire business model is based on the fact that it will be cheaper to obtain and H-1 than to hire locally. This is fundamentally fucked up. Most H-1s are coming from diploma mills or have no education at all and use 'experience evaluations' which are another rubber stamp service. It's not truly high-skilled labor. If they were high-skilled they'd just apply as an O-1 applicant. H-1s are effectively apprentice engineers. They usually do not have any specialization--so why are they needed? To keep wages flat. It's a corporate handout. Look at how STEM salaries have stagnated: http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-i...
But really, H-1s aren't nearly as bad as the L-1s. L-1s have no prevailing wage and no education requirements. Fortune500s bring over L-1s and keep them on foreign payroll (for up to 6 years) and then can send them abroad for a year and bring them back for another 6. I've seen L-1s coming to work for major oil companies where the applicant has 20 years of experience and a Master's degree--making $15,000/year.
The problem with freedom of labour and open borders is that it's usually just one way. How many Americans are going to work abroad in India? How many Canadians are going to work in China? It's feel-good rhetoric but ultimately it's just an excuse to flood richer nations with workers from poorer nations. I'd be all for this system if there was some kind of tit-for-tat program where India gets as many visas given to them as they give to us proportionally--but it will never happen. If STEM and engineers are so in demand why have their wages stagnated? Why has the average income actually dropped in Silicon Valley? There's a disconnect in what they claim is happening and what is really happening.
The other problem I see with H-1Bs is the way they connect to Green Card/Permanent Residency. Once you file your I-140, you can stay on your H-1 indefinitely. Your H-1 doesn't have to match your I-140 either, so you can be employed as something lowly like Customer Support Engineer and then file the I-140 for a "Senior Data Scientist" or whatever and then drag out the Green Card process to keep their prevailing wage down. Oh and guess what? The companies and the law firms coordinate to do this. Why? Because once the I-140 is filed the employee is locked into that company and they can hold the Green Card out as a carrot and get a loyal obedient worker. It's a sick exploitive system. It's bad for everyone but the corporate executives who are getting a bonus for meeting their budgets.
Moreover, corporations also coordinate mass-layoffs and filing for Green Cards. They will file for hundreds, sometimes thousands of Green Cards, then wait to announce the layoffs once the I-140s are filed. If they did it the reverse they wouldn't be allowed to file for the I-140s. I saw this happen monthly in the Silicon Valley.
However, I have also seen H-1Bs be used to bring over employees from companies that were acquired abroad for reallly smart people making unique products or some kind of breakthrough technology. Those are totally legitimate uses of the program. Those aren't the problems. The thing the government needs to learn is that anything that is available to companies that has a monetary reward for telling "white lies" to the government and depends on the companies "being honest" let alone understanding or agreeing with the overarching intent of the legislation -- is going to have the absolute shit abused out of it eventually.
These low pay schemes are because of the restrictions instead of in spite of them. If we had open borders and none of this visa nonsense, why would some guy from china work under market wage when he could just as easily apply for the same jobs as everyone else in the market? A major flood of applicants might lower wages, but not nearly as much than these schemes do, because the worker is basically "paying" for his right to be in the country through lower wages.
These visa schemes are a modern-day indentured servitude, plain and simple.
2. Same case for L1. They have degrees in addition to work experience. Nobody makes 15K in US on L1. That's just a lie. I used to make 15K USD back in Chennai, India. Not many people would make the trip to US for 15K.
3. Americans don't work abroad in India. Americans work for Indian companies here in US. Every time an Indian airliner buys Boeing over Airbus and everytime a US arms manufacturer gets a deal over the Russian or European companies, the Indian companies employ Americans. It's a trade off mostly in America's favor. Indians export technology and Americans export finished goods. Consumers of raw technology always gains in this trade.
4. The problem with GC is not because the H1B's abuse it. But because US has a stupid immigration policy where they equate India or China with a billion people to say Kuwait or Vatican and give equals quotas per country. If this is fixed, the applications would get quickly processed and the wrongful applications would be denied.
5. Mass layoffs with simultaneous I-140 filings... Getting someone a Green Card would cost upwards of 15K. And they don't exactly come cheap. green Cards usually have higher wage requirements. Also I-140 holder can switch an employer after 6 months. Nothing chains them to the employer.
I think you misunderstand the process. First, the DOL sets the prevailing wages, but the employers choose what location, title, and experience level to apply under. Check this out: http://flcdatacenter.com/CaseH1B.aspx Play around with it and see what you find.
Now, say you're a company and you have multiple locations. You apply for the employee at the cheapest location, then pick a title that will get a lower prevailing wage, and say they are entry level when really they have 5 years of experience. So the prevailing wage determination is skewed. This is what I mean about telling a white lie. Anything that is available to companies that has a monetary reward for telling "white lies" to the government and depends on the companies "being honest" let alone understanding or agreeing with the overarching intent of the legislation -- is going to have the absolute shit abused out of it eventually.
If a Software Engineer gets a higher prevailing wage than a Software Developer (or vice versa) according to the DOL. Which title do you think the employer will pick to apply under?
2. I've seen multiple cases filed for L-1s around $15,000 and many more for around $25,000-$28,000. The L-1s get around the prevailing wage requirements by companies providing corporate housing and ammenities and meals at work. I worked on thousands of cases, so I am going to believe my sample size is more representative than your anecdotal experience.
3. This is an intellectually dishonest argument. Trading goods is not the same thing as employment. Stop trying to conflate them. And even still, following your argument Americans are still 'employing' millions in India via imported goods. It's still completely one-sided.
4. I disagree, I don't think India and China should get preferential treatment for having a larger population. That's ridiculous.
5. Again, I've seen this happen many times. The bitter truth H-1s appeal to employers because employers see them as exploitable, cheaper, and more ignorant of local labour customs and laws.
If you're an officer of the court, aren't you obligated to report this? Or is it more likely you're not a lawyer and don't actually understand what's going on?
Disclosure -- I'm an L1-B. I'm paid higher than the prevailing wage. By far.
It's only a problem if you're a working class American or an Indian business. It's great if you're a working class Indian or an American business.
He continued, under his breath, "Because Microsoft wouldn't have to pay prevailing wage to even more engineers".
Look - if you're outside the US you can ignore this comment but for those of us in the US, this is a screw job.
Most H-1Bs are used to import cheap - ridiculously cheap - labor and displace middle class workers. Period. There are almost always people in the US that can do the work but not at the wage that the Msoft or whomever would like to pay. The "we can't find qualified workers" bullshit is just that.
As if the collusion to suppress wages wasn't bad enough...
I'm not a big fan of letting employers make immigration decisions. There's too much of an incentive to try to get low cost labor, which subsidizes stupid business practices. Sure, employers could invest in automation and smarter operating procedures, or we can just plug the hole as cheaply as possible.
H1Bs are unlikely to be big entrepreneurial catalysts because they are effectively tied to their employer and in a tricky legal framework. Honestly - I thought that was the whole point of the visa. And not to too much of a snob here, but the three immigrants mentioned in the Fortune 500 were all graduates of elite american universities (Andy Grove - Berkeley, Jerry Yang, Sergey - Stanford), which proves mostly nothing about the visa program.
I think a much better policy for America is to allow the top 50-100 universities by US News to determine who is qualified to enter. those measures are not perfect, but it is rate-limited by the size of their degree programs and they have an incentive to keep the quality of admitted applicants high.
The only difference is, if you have a masters or higher degree, your H1B visa processing is done through a separate quota.
In today's system, unless you are a PhD with many publications in prestigious conferences/journals, etc., straight out of college (i.e., BS or MS), permanent residency is a long and highly bureaucratic process for most applicants. So essentially, your spouse cannot work till you get a green card. Here is an interesting story about an early Google employee highlighting this problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/business/12immig.html?page...
Also, in 2014, people are not as desperate to live and work in the US as you think, to arrange marriages for this sole purpose. Further, this rule-change applies to that subset of H1B workers who are on track to get green cards.
Employment-based green cards could take even 10 years to be processed because of purely administrative and bureaucratic delays.
Besides, the H1B workers affected by this rule are usually highly skilled and are likely to have similar quality of life if they lived and worked in their home country. When you take this into account, the loophole-theory that you talk about jumps into the realm of paranoid conspiracy theory.
(IANAL)
I am fine with citizenship or automatic green cards for accepted Harvard students. That's a pretty prestigious designation and very hard to obtain. Harvard does not give out slots lightly. However, there are a lot of degree granting institutions in the US with lower standards, such that I don't think all universities should have that privilege.
I have worked with dozens of H1B employees. It's really stupid to ask - since they are here working - but it occasionally is discussed whether they would consider going home. I think the answer is usually - maybe - when I'm ready to retire.
The opportunities here are still "on average" better - and it's not just "the economy" - infrastructure, rule of law, space-to-people ratio, etc.
It is just this: in the current system, there is no way of rewarding merit. That NY Times example is one data point. A second one is this, from Newsweek: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:88OoGN... .
The USCIS has decided that one measure of the 'worthiness' or 'best-of-the-best'ness is workers who are valuable enough for a company to be applying for the green-card on their behalf.
The best-of-the-best, the talented workers (whether they are from Harvard or No-name Indian Engineering Institute- is immaterial) are put in the same pile as the 'mass-H1Bs'. This is a problem that is inherent to complex irrational bureaucracies like the American immigration system.
I don't see how you can classify people based on which university they go to. A person may be talented in spite of the university they go to, and this is a question that a company or a VC has to answer.
So what if H1B workers intend on staying in the US? It is the individual's choice. If you want to go deeper into the question of 'who deserves H1Bs', you need to answer question scuh as, what is the purpose of nationality? Why is an American citizen more eligible to work in the US, than say, a Chinese or an Indian citizen? Is there something superior about 'American'ness? Is it because the domicile's parents and grandparents paid taxes? But what makes the domicile entitled to the fruits of the labors of their parents and grandparents? And so on.
Funny thing is, to the average person these days, I sound like the extremist. To use your example, would be an interesting example to contrast China and India attitudes towards parents/children to the way you think Americans should act and think.
- allow for employer-sponsored visas like the H-1B, but beyond sponsoring make the whole deal strictly about the US government and the individual. - after 4 years of full-time employment history, the person should be eligible for a green card, irrespectively of their origin, occupation etc.
Because the American government exists to serve Americans. It's not fair and it's not supposed to be. How easily we forget this in our pampered American existence. Ask yourself if the Indian or Chinese government is asking what's best for American citizens.
You miss the point that the definition of 'American' is quite arbitrary. It is 'fair' in the sense that it is a sort of 'Nash equilibrium'. Since around WW2, 'citizenship' has been based on a set of arbitrary norms [1]. You can become an American by just being born here, when your Indian or Chinese parents were visiting New York City for vacation. You can become an American by working here for 20 years, getting a green card, and then becoming naturalized. You could also become an American citizen in other ways. Further, America has a higher bar than Canada, and Switzerland has a higher bar for citizenship than America. There is nothing innately patriotic or 'American' about it. Until 1952, Asians and Asian Indians were barred from citizenship. Until civil rights laws of 1965, immigration was based on quotas[2].
[1] Steven Pinker, 'The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined,' Viking Books, 2011 [2] http://www.umass.edu/complit/aclanet/USMigrat.html