[tatpacc]

> With the turnover of good staff, the only way to keep the better ones was to get the visas sorted to nearshore them in US

> largely defeating the purpose of the cost saving.

agree on most part including that onshore billing is obvious more than offshore but still for client it's saving as oppose to hiring FTE. Often client also want good resource to stick so they allow them to move to onsite. In my case, we informed client after my H1B was stamped, that I have to move to States either in this project or other project, client approved in 2-3 hours. For the another resource, client took 4-5 months to decide and then replied that we don't have budget for onshore billing.

So in case of good resource, it's often win-win for everyone involved.

[steveBK123]

Yes when viewed this way it can be an alternative recruiting pipeline for good nearshore staff. It would be better to just directly recruit this way and skip the middle man consulting firms taking so much margin and having to hire teams of 20-30 to poach the top 5 nearshore.