You have no idea how this administration is systematically pushing family oriented tech people away by creating gridlocks in the legal immigration process.
Well, big companies abusing the system certainly doesn't help.
Having ceilings based on a % of company number of employees or some other mechanism would go a long way (or the chance of draw being related to their salary)
Moving to a function of salary instead of a lottery would be an improvement, but not if it is accompanied by a cut in the quota which the Trump admin is reported to want. Bringing people to the US who earn more than the median wage enormously benefits Americans. We've built our economy on a brain drain from the rest of the world and we're making every effort right now to fuck that up.
>> Well, big companies abusing the system certainly doesn't help.
They already have a legal requirement to pay prevailing wage before they can get a visa. That means at least six figures in the bay area.
There are a few reasons Americans don't take these six figure jobs:
1. Don't want to live in California/too expensive
2. This is the more common reason: Americans don't do STEM much, cannot compete with internationals. Obviously not all Americans are incompetent but given the number of open positions in the bay area, there are just not enough of them.
As an anecdote, my manager has had 2 open positions for 7 months now, paying $125k base + sign on + relocation + bonus + stock for a new grad. Guess how many we've filled after 7 months? A big fat zero.
The only way our product would sustain is by hiring people. So we eventually ended up hiring an h1b Chinese guy who was very very smart and capable. Then, because legal immigration process is choked off, he still couldn't join after 4 months. So we just had him join an offshore satellite office and moved his projects there.
If he plays his cards right, the project will grow and he will help us hire more in the offshore site.
As an anecdote, my manager has had 2 open positions for 7 months now, paying $125k base + sign on + relocation + bonus + stock for a new grad. Guess how many we've filled after 7 months? A big fat zero.
Why would anyone move to California for $125K when they could live in one of 20 other major cities, make the same amount with a lower cost of living?
GP didn't say $125k total comp. Counting sign-on, bonus, and stock, it could be as much as $200k total comp - for a new grad. Which other cities/industries pay that much? (outside of finance or law, at the top end)
What are the chances that the stock+bonus will be an extra $75K per year? Also, the stock and probably sign on bonus probably has a vesting period. What will be the future value of the stock? What if the project doesn’t go as planned and they let the potential employee go before the vesting period?
Cash is king. Anything else shifts the risks away from the better capitalized corporation to the less capitalized potential employee.
If it's a FAANG-type company, the stock has done well in the past 10 years so it's been a pretty good bet to make. Public tech companies have done well overall.
Sign-on bonuses don't have a vesting period. That's why they're called "sign-on" - you get them when you sign on. You might have to give them back, pro-rated, if you leave the company within a certain time period (typically a year).
> Cash is king.
I'm not disagreeing here. I'm just pointing out that the fixed $125k number in your mind is inaccurate in reality. The total value of the stock+sign-on+bonus may not be $75k (that might be the ideal case) but it's not $0 either. The total comp is a lot of money for any new grad in any city in the world (again, outside of finance and law at the top end).
Having ceilings based on a % of company number of employees or some other mechanism would go a long way (or the chance of draw being related to their salary)