[wippler]

This chart is entirely misleading. In any given year, there are only 85k new H1B visas. That's it, it has not grown nor shrunk.

Reason for increase in population shown here is H1B renewals. Normally the way this works is H1Bs convert to permanent residents, but due to the country caps, Indian/Chinese H1B holders keep renewing their visas contributing to this increase. Again these are people who are already here and got their approval sometime in the past, so its not like in 2022, companies collectively hired 685,117 (which is also why you see the decrease in 2023 since due to covid, a very little bit of backlog for residency cleared).

(Not to mention the sentiment of comments here is entirely disappointing, but I guess that's the vibe these days)

[darth_avocado]

I think every time the topic of H1B comes on HN, a lot of people have a lot of opinions, but don’t fully understand the immigration system. Like you correctly pointed out, the increase in H1Bs in the country is mostly contributed by the fact that country caps force some nationalities to permanently stay on H1B while others can naturalize faster. There are hundreds of thousands of people who come into the country every year through other visas (and also on H1B from other countries) and naturalize and take up jobs in the country. But that doesn’t matter because they are now US citizens.

If people from India/China were allowed to naturalize as fast as other countries, you’d not have the chart of number of H1Bs grow in the country.

[luckydata]

if people from India and China were allowed to naturalize as fast things would spiral out of control. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but H1B visas are absolutely a wage control mechanism for US corporations even if that's not the spirit of the law. Note that I'm also an immigrant.

[darth_avocado]

There’s a lot to be said about “spiraling out of control”. You could argue it’s fair for everyone. But you could also argue that a country like China which is as big as Europe gets the same amount of green cards as Luxembourg. You could argue there will be less diversity, but then you’d be arguing that the French and the Italian cultures are very different from each other, but people from NorthEast India are the same as people from South of India culturally and ethnically.

Anyway, if we are so concerned about “not letting things go out of control”. A simple solution is also to set those country caps on the H1B program. There can be other solutions and the conversation can be a lot more nuanced but HN is not the forum for it when it comes to the topic of H1B.

[bombcar]

The H1B “problem” would disappear if companies were required to pay 50% more than the median salary for the position for one.

[darth_avocado]

The problem would disappear, but they would disappear to India or one of the other offshoring countries. I however agree that the pay needs to be AT LEAST the median salary for the position to avoid abuse.

[nebula8804]

Tax the American companies that focus their hiring efforts abroad. Just another tariff. They will generate the people they need in this country by lunch time.

[darth_avocado]

Would probably work for some roles, not all. And the tax would be a very big number.

[trhway]

Google would be required to pay 900K instead of 600K. You think that would stop Google?

[scarface_74]

Or they would just move some of their development departments to another country. Google doesn’t need to bring developers into the US at all.

It still wouldn’t help.

[trhway]

For companies like Google, H1B isn’t about bringing into US, it is just an expensive way to satisfy their US hiring hunger.

That difference can be understood by imagining that H1B isn’t foreign devs, instead it is devs grown in a jar by the State Department - Google would buy them the same.

[osti]

"Note that I'm also an immigrant."

This sentence doesn't really help your statement, it just makes you a gatekeeper.

[kccqzy]

Exactly. In liberal cities I have lived in, it is almost always the earlier immigrants that resent and denigrate the later immigrants. It's pure gatekeeping. Like "I suffered during the immigration process and therefore you have to suffer at least as much as I have, or it isn't fair." Or like "the recent immigrants aren't as hardworking as older ones and they don't deserve immigration."

[kccqzy]

The so-called wage control mechanism is never the intention of H1B. Workers with H1Bs have to meet prevailing wage standards before the H1B is approved: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/foreign-labor/wages

I get that there are probably loopholes in the law. But then the solution is to fix the loopholes and tighten enforcement. Give DoL access to IRS data. Improve the definition of prevailing wages. A lot of things can be done to fix H1B so that it behaves like how it's intended.

[darth_avocado]

DOL does have the data to determine prevailing wages. In fact the wages reported in the application for H1B is often lower than what the immigrant is getting paid because DOL does not accept bonuses and RSUs and other options as guaranTeed wage. So you could have an H1B petition with $200k but in reality they could be earning $300k+ with bonuses and RSUs.

[bitsage]

Paying prevailing wage doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the salary a company would have paid/are paying to American workers in the same role. Three-fifths of h-1b jobs are certified at the two lowest prevailing wage levels and the median age of an h-1b beneficiary is 33 years old.

[kccqzy]

> Paying prevailing wage doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the salary a company would have paid/are paying to American workers in the same role.

That's part of the fix I'm proposing. Improve the definition of prevailing wage.

[dyauspitr]

I feel like the situation for US citizens would improve if they were allowed to naturalize. Their wages would go up and companies wouldn’t have the relatively cheaper labor pool to constantly draw from.

[darth_avocado]

This is another mistake what people make when describing H1Bs. Yes there are abuses where bad actors abuse the system and undercut the local wages. But a huge portion of the annual H1B allocation goes to people who are not the “cheaper labor pool”. They get paid the same wages AND the companies spend additional money to the order of thousands of dollars to sponsor the visa. Google is not hiring H1Bs on a cheaper rate. They still get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars every year.

But I do agree with the theory that allowing a lot of these H1Bs would be a net benefit for the economy. A lot of people who naturalize end up leaving jobs and starting businesses that employ more people. We should be encouraging that, but instead the system actively discourages that.

[luckydata]

it's not a mistake because it's what ends up happening. There's serious research on it that everyone seems to want to ignore: https://www.nber.org/papers/w23153

[dyauspitr]

If they’re not a cheaper labor pool then the only reason companies wouldn’t hire them over citizens is because they are tied to the company. This would also be solved by naturalization.

Any iteration of this turns out to be better for US citizens if they’re are naturalized.

Not to mention that 50% of all unicorns in the US are started by immigrants, like 60% of those by specifically Indians.

[JackYoustra]

mariel boatlift study found that even with a 7% short-term supply shock to labor concentrated in only miami in only low wage work led to no disruption in either employment or wages: https://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/mariel-impact.pdf

lump of labor simply never happens. I know it's fashionable to say 'wage suppression' but wages mostly reflect productivity in competitive AND deregulated markets!

[wakawaka28]

>There are hundreds of thousands of people who come into the country every year through other visas (and also on H1B from other countries) and naturalize and take up jobs in the country. But that doesn’t matter because they are now US citizens.

What you seem to be saying is that the problem is worse than we think for natives because of these immigrants dropping off of stats after they become citizens. Of course I think this myself. It doesn't matter if you make these people citizens so much, the point is that their effect on the job market is independent of citizenship.

[darth_avocado]

Which is why you need a comprehensive immigration reform instead of a twitter thread that gets discussed on HN.

[wakawaka28]

Raising awareness of issues is the main way democracy (and probably all functional forms of government) works. Talking about it does that, even though it might seem to do nothing. Everything else costs money.

[BeetleB]

> In any given year, there are only 85k new H1B visas.

Minor nitpick, but if you get an H-1 visa to work at a university, it's not part of that 85K limit.

But yes, your point is valid. And the headline is editorialized - they cherry picked the year 2011, because it's the lowest. It was the lowest because we were knee deep in the financial crisis, and many companies suspended/reduced their reliance on foreign labor precisely because they'd have a hard time convincing the government that they couldn't find a qualified local.

[Aspos]

What about cap-exempt H1Bs? There are tons of new companies which streamlined the process and which are offering "nearly-guaranteed H1B with no lottery"

[screye]

There is no such thing for tech companies. Not sure where you heard about it.

Only non-profits are allowed to skip the lotteries. I've seen it apply to universities and hospitals, but never to a for-profit tech company,

[junar]

A cap-exempt H-1B doesn't let you work for a "company".

Only universities, university-affiliated nonprofits, nonprofit research organizations, and government research organizations can sponsor one. Furthermore, even after you obtain a cap-exempt H-1B, you would be required to go through the lottery like anyone else if you want to work at an employer subject to the H-1B cap.

[jatins]

How can _anyone_ bypass lottery when that's a USCIS process?

[Aspos]

I understand there are some exceptions made for academic institutions so these companies employ people into a "participating university" for a token number of hours per month, person comes in and once they are in the country they can pursue different opportunities to get employed and change their status.

This cap-exempt H1B bypasses lottery, can be obtained in about 3 months any time during the year.

[atlgator]

Yes - When Microsoft requests 14,000 H-1Bs after laying off 9,000 American workers, it's above and beyond the 85k cap.

[harshalizee]

No, it's not. The limit of new is universally capped at 85k. They can request as many applications as they want. The lottery still only picks a total of 85k

[intermerda]

All the Microsoft layoffs were US citizens? Do you have a source for this?

[darth_avocado]

They were not because in a layoff you cannot prefer a specific protected category like race, gender, age AND nationality.

The 9000 number is also a global number which includes layoffs in countries all over the world.

The argument “9000 US workers were fired and X visa applications were applied for” is also very reductive. The layoffs were in gaming, sales and other divisions, meanwhile the visa applications were for people who either already are on visas in other divisions like engineering and are continuing their status or for people in newer positions that have nothing to do with sales or gaming.

[square_usual]

Source: I made it up

[trhway]

i think you're mistaken. The H1B cap is 65K. Cap-exempts are capped at 20K. Thus total cap is 85K. No above and beyond of that number.

Speaking about original post US tech industry is 16M people. So 600K+ of H1Bs, suppose they all in tech, is 4%. Blip on a radar.

[square_usual]

No, you're wrong too. The 20k is the Master's cap, only applicable to students who did a Master's or above in the US. Cap exempt refers to H1bs granted to US/State employers, who can get H1bs for employees without any cap whatsoever, and at any time of the year.

[trhway]

thanks, i see. So, MS can't get them really.

https://www.nafsa.org/professional-resources/browse-by-inter...

"AC21 [codified at INA § 214(g)(5)(A)-(B)] exempts the following petitioners from the H-1B cap:

Institutions of higher education

Nonprofit entities related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education

Nonprofit research organizations

Governmental research organizations

[darth_avocado]

This. Cap exempts are usually PHDs and literal medical doctors.

[ianferrel]

I don't think it's misleading. It's clearly a population chart, not a count of newly issued visas.

[xboxnolifes]

It's misleading because it says "The H-1B program grew...", which to many implies that it was doing more immigration. It wasn't. There was less naturalization.

[ianferrel]

The chart says "H-1B Population Estimate". The chart is not at all misleading.

The first line of the tweet might be misleading. Although I also disagree that it is, because it's accompanied by a well-labeled chart, so you don't have to infer a meaning; it's spelled out right there!

[rs186]

Only if there is another line of "new green card holder previously holding H1B visa" which is expected to show exactly the opposite trend.

You still don't understand the problem here.

[dyauspitr]

No it isn’t. It’s more like a rolling cumulative chart of all the prior years’ H1Bs combined.

[ianferrel]

...less the people who no longer have an H1B visa.

Just like a population chart is a rolling cumulative chart of prior years' births, less deaths.