[morsmodr]

I am a front-end developer on an H1 visa. There is a reason for the slowdown. A lot of companies, Indian IT or consultancy firms in the US are abusing the H1 visa process. They use lawyers and high sounding words to make roles such as functional/manual tester or other non-critical non-STEM roles to sound as technical STEM based roles. IMHO these roles can be easily done by American locals without STEM or technical background, if they have an opportunity. A bit of process and business training is enough. Whether they do get into such roles or not is a different ball game altogether. But the premise of H1 is to provide visa for people with skills that the American market doesn't have. This process is easy to abuse because people in the administration are not tech savvy. Until people from tech in the US decide to take part in governance, there is not much that can be done besides slowing the process a bit so that current people who work at USCIS have the time to gauge applications in a fair way.

[Tyrek]

I feel like there's a misreading of the premise of the H-1B program here. If you'll refer to the USCIS website here [0], you'll note that the main prerequisites for the H-1B visa are a) Educated or Licensed b) Paid on par to American workers c) Not impacting the pay of American workers

Upon review, it's apparent that the 'visa for people with skills that the American market doesn't have' argument doesn't fly - the requirements only establish that the visa holder be competitive with Americans. You might be thinking of the 'extraordinary ability' category of visas, which are O-series (instead of the H-series of H-1Bs).

I'm also unclear on your criticism of consultancies - there's no criteria for the job to be STEM in nature, and I don't think it's an extraordinary view to hold that other fields may be technical/specialized. Fundamentally, very very few employees are irreplaceable (for good reason) by someone with sufficient motivation/training.

In defense of H-1 visa holders (especially fresh grads), I'd argue that if you outcompete locals (on even salary conditions) through fairly rigorous recruitment processes, overcoming the lack of local network and cultural/language barriers and survive the lottery cull, then the position has been earned. [1].

Finally, your argument about 'having the time to gauge applications' is absurd. Either the process was working before, or it wasn't. If the program was compliant prior, then extending processing times is fundamentally a violation of due process, and effectively re-interpreting existing law.

[0] https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-worker... [1] Fair disclosure, this was my path

[munk-a]

It's that (c) that I really take issue with, H-1B workers tend to be paid below par and their immigration status being tied to employment greatly lowers their ability to self-advocate. I also (cynical opinion incoming) think that companies target cultures with less emphasis on self-worth when bringing people in on these. I think people should absolutely be able to immigrate on a fair and just basis but I really dislike H-1Bs due to the impact that process has on the immigrant and those around them - I'd rather we all came looking for employment as equals.

[jogjayr]

> their immigration status being tied to employment greatly lowers their ability to self-advocate

H1B holders are free to change employers, but the new employer has to apply for a new visa (not subject to the cap). I've changed my job 3 times on an H1B, always for a better role and more pay.

[pandaman]

It is true for the H1B holders with the visas under 6 years. However there is a whole class of H1Bs who had been in status for longer. They manage to extend their status beyond 6 years based on approved I-140 and the fact that they cannot apply for a Green Card because of the country limit. For these people the H1B is the only available legal status and it entirely depends on the I-140, which belongs to the employer.

Theoretically, nothing prevents them from changing jobs just like with a <6 y.o. H1B. Also, theoretically, nothing prevents the old employer from recalling the I-140. In such a case there are, probably, ways to still retain legal status but they are far more complicated than filing for a new H1B.

[jogjayr]

> Also, theoretically, nothing prevents the old employer from recalling the I-140

Also untrue. Employers can only revoke I-140s within the first 6 months after approval. After that, they can't do anything if the employee decides to leave.

[pandaman]

Oh, that's a new rule from 2017, I did not know that. Worked as I described before that though.

[sjg007]

I’m paid below H1Bs at my company in the same job title and I’m a us citizen. So it all depends... I have a lot of work life flexibility in my job though. So maybe it evens out!

[morsmodr]

By 'not have' I meant 'shortage' of people. Like literal shortage because there aren't enough graduates. I am wrong though on expecting an H1 role to have a STEM requirement. But the consultancies I talk about pay employees under H1 visa below market value. Same goes for the WITCH companies.

The challenge with finding out whether the process was working before is inherently difficult is what I think. Whom is it working for? And for whom it isn't? Again I could be wrong

[johntitor1]

Just curious, isn't the purpose of outsourcing not only to import workers with unavailable talent but also to import workers when there's a shortage of local workers?

How does it apply to tech?

[holy_city]

They altered the rules for the H-1B visa program to deal with abuses.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2019/01/02/recent...

The slowdown has nothing to do with H-1B abuses or exploitation. Nor is it because the administration "isn't tech savvy."

It's because the current administration was elected with a mandate from their base to stem immigration in all forms. They do not want more immigrants in this country, and are doing everything they can to prevent more people from coming here, staying here, or being allowed to stay here.

[raincom]

I think that's where USCIS is telling employers to prove that the occupation that a company tries to fill, is indeed a "specialty occupation".

Right now, USCIS is not forcing established American companies (FAANG, Microsoft, etc) to prove "specialty occupation". There is a reason for it: these big companies can take USCIS to federal courts, thereby curtailing the discretion of USCIS. So, USCIS is going after feeder companies: staffing companies (body shops); outsourcing comnpanies (WITCH and MNC consultancies like Capgemini, Deloitte).

One can turn any job into a specialty occupation with a four-page description of buzz words.

[redindian75]

>But the premise of H1 is to provide visa for people with skills that the American market doesn't have.

how does that square with

>I am a front-end developer on an H1 visa.

So let me get this straight, other immigrant's jobs can be easily done by locals with minimal training, hence it is a scam. BUT your 'front-end skills' are so unique that no other American can do it?

[outworlder]

> So let me get this straight, other immigrant's jobs can be easily done by locals with minimal training, hence it is a scam. BUT your 'front-end skills' are so unique that no other American can do it?

His _position_ may require more than _minimal_ training. We don't know as we haven't seen the application.

[morsmodr]

By 'not have' I meant 'shortage' of people. Like literal shortage because there aren't enough graduates. The market might demand say 10,000 people per year but only 3k-4k are present. This situation is what I was trying to explain. I am not saying any other immigrant skill besides mine is easy to train. A person working in Big 3 consulting firm and providing strategy consulting to clients also has skills which are in demand but the existing populace just doesn't have enough MBAs or people with post-grad (that is the requirement for strategy consulting for the most part)