Comment by x0x0 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by x0x0 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

h1b is flat on topic: see comments below. The act of legislating is trading between competing interests; various people are attempting to use startups as a whole to get self-serving visa changes with zero to negative benefits to the majority of the members of the startup community: non-founders.

On to you: your situation is the exception to the common use of h1bs. You're probably a giant minority. The common use as far as I know of h1bs is to hold down wages of engineering. Microsoft and yahoo laying off engineers while simultaneously applying for h1b visas trivially demonstrates the lie in the "engineer shortage" nonsense.

Employee friendly changes to h1b visas could include many things: removing the tie between the sponsoring company and the employee (so if he or she is underpaid he or she can easily switch jobs); or aggressive investigation of prevailing wage requirements (oops there goes Infosys' business model); or 5+ year bans on h1b applications post layoffs. But bluntly, I think we have more than enough visas already. I'd change my mind if I saw engineering wages rise, concerted action on the part of ceos to help control housing costs, and concerted action on the part of ceos to help fix US education and increase the domestic engineering pipeline; or concerted action on the part of ceos to police visa fraud (see infosys, or epic systems, etc).

Theoretically, the H1B application requires evidence that the employee is receiving market-standard pay for the role fulfilled. However, there's a gradual effect over time of course when there's a lot of expats who are willing to work at the lower bound of that pay. So Re: H1B, I pretty much agree with you, and I think immigrant employee visas need to be restructured to really punish the Wipros/Infosys' that just import manslaves that are fed change to output code, lowering the average engineer's pay.

I was raising the point regarding my position because that seemed to be the thesis of the article -- for people more in my position than for employees of companies on the scale of Microsoft, etc. We are not entering the US with the objective of taking other people's jobs. The only reason I applied for the H1B was because it was the legit path with the most reasonable chance to get cleared. I think it's the wrong kind of visa for a founder to attempt to get, there just isn't a better one.

So YC and people like me are hoping for a visa similar to the O1A, except right now that is expensive to file, vague in the conditions that need to be cleared, and usually needs you to foot a fat lawyer bill too. And it's a bit of a stretch to be applied to founders. Essentially, the existing visas are all hardly different from 10-15 (or more) years ago, times have changed, and the government has done nothing to accommodate the changes in the economy.

yeah, but we both know that evidence is farcical. Epic System's practices are pretty well documented. And just this week, I was hit up by a recruiter looking to pay "up to 120k" for a data scientist with 4-7 years experience, ms/phd, and experience with hadoop and large-scale stochastic optimization. It's not hard to figure out why someone's paying for a recruiter to try to fill a job with a stupid low salary.

Refusing to support companies asking for friendly visa changes for free is employees' best bet at getting said companies to support employee-friendly changes.

Strong suggestions.

Re: the one I know the most about, "removing the tie between the sponsoring company and the employee (so if he or she is underpaid he or she can easily switch jobs)" This is partially done already in AC21: http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/ac21-portability-chang...

The key word is portability, which is a much, much weaker tie between the sponsoring company and the employee, both in terms of job title/salary and switching employers.

However, it's incomplete because employer-based (EB) green card applications aren't portable, so there's still a horrible incentive system there that has a huge negative impact on H-1B-affected wages. Green card portability was included in S744, the comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) legislation, that just failed.

That said, these are all legislative changes. With the failure of CIR, it will be more than a few years before another major effort is attempted on immigration, and at least until January 2017 until even small immigration reforms will be proposed in Congress.

Flatly, there is no chance of any legislative effort succeeding in coming months or even years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com