[thrwy10]

It absolutely, positively hurts local labor - naturalized citizens - etc. Without a doubt.

I disagree with this statement. I am on an H1 and know several other people who are on H1s and can testify that this is a generalization. There are many ways to end up on an H1, overseas body shops is one avenue and American grad schools are another. Most H1s I know, myself included, graduated from good schools, have worked hard within the framework of their visas, have absorbed local culture and have invested almost 100% of what they made back into the local economy, not to mention the out-of-state fees they paid their institutions. From what I see and understand, they are pretty well paid, in some cases better than the local populace and have succeeded solely because they are talented. The hardships that their spouses on H4s go through is an entirely different matter!

That said, I can understand where you are coming from and know that there is abuse within the system. Truly, fake resumes are rampant among H1 consultancies. And although the visa itself is severely constrained, these people thrive due to lack of enforcement. That should change.

Edit: For people who say H1 is indentured servitude.

H1 is not quite indentured servitude, and you can switch employers. Although there is quite a bit of uncertainity associated with it, its still not the worst part. What bothers me, is the DOLs PERM process which is the first step to obtain a green card. This one step in itself is what can be said to make H1s bonded laborers. First, the company makes you sign a statment saying you can't leave until after 2 years upon getting your Green Card - else you'll be billed for it (approx 25K). Second, the DOL takes its own sweet time adjudicating these applications - currently 6 months (or 1.5-2 years if your application is audited, which 30-40% chance). And while you are free to switch employers, this process takes a hard reset and you've to go back to the end of the line. Unless, you stick with the shitty job, and wait out the approval and file your I-140. At this point, the H1 can be renewed indefinitely in terms of 3 years as long as each new company goes through the above process or you get your Green Card. Hopefully, the recent executive order will make this better, but only time can tell. Personally, the reset button has been hit twice for me.

[thedufer]

I don't think the point you take issue with is really debatable. The only way it could not be true if there is actually no one in the local labor market who can do the job, and that's a very difficult argument to make. Outside of that, every H1 is a job a citizen isn't getting.

You didn't touch on this at all, so I'm not really sure what your point is. I think you're debating a strawman.

[thrwy10]

> The only way it could not be true if there is actually no one in the local labor market who can do the job, and that's a very difficult argument to make. Outside of that, every H1 is a job a citizen isn't getting.

Does that mean being a citizen entitles one to a job regardless of qualification? Also, does that mean 100% of the US should be employed before bringing in foreign workers? I think such generalizations are far fetched. The conspiracy theory that claims that H1s are all low paid workers falls flat when examined closely.

[anjc]

> Does that mean being a citizen entitles one to a job regardless of qualification? Also, does that mean 100% of the US should be employed before bringing in foreign workers?

You're making up arguments and arguing with yourself here. Nobody said that being a citizen entitles a person to a job. But the law states that a H1B visa can be extended only IF a citizen can't be found that fulfils the requirements. Companies have been caught flouting this law, and purposely not finding citizens. You seem to have a problem with "every H1 is a job a citizen isn't getting", but, that's the point of a H1B.

> The conspiracy theory that claims that H1s are all low paid workers falls flat when examined closely.

They are not conspiracy theories, and they do not fall flat. The information is all open and available.

[thedufer]

Note that there's no value judgment being made here. Nor am I claiming that H1s are low paid. You're still arguing against the same strawman.

To reword: if an H1 gets a job, a qualified citizen is not getting that job. Except in very exceptional circumstances, this hurts said citizen, and by extension the labor pool of people who could be substituted in for said citizen.

[thrwy10]

You didn't specify 'qualified' in the original post. If it was implied and I didn't get it, I'm sorry. I agree that if there is a qualified local, they should get these jobs before bringing in foreign labor. Although, my argument isn't a straw man.

[thedufer]

I thought that "local labor market" implicitly only contained people who were local and could do the requisite labor, but that might not be the agreed-upon meaning. Sorry for the confusion.

Strawman-ness is contextual. You were arguing against an argument that is, in fact, used. However, you did so after quoting something that was not making that argument, but instead a weaker one, and one which your response didn't really respond to.

[davidw]

By this logic, we should not allow people to have more than two children, or else the surplus children will grow up and take the jobs. Because there are only a fixed number of jobs to go around, right? I read last week that the bureau of labor statistics determined the number: 309,219,419.

[thedufer]

I don't know what logic you're using, but it didn't come from my post. As I pointed out elsewhere, I didn't make any value judgments. I claimed, essentially, that someone taking a job hurts others who may have competed for that job. I did not claim that there's any need to protect them, with legislation or otherwise.

[davidw]

> someone taking a job

The problem is that you're thinking of "a job". The economy is composed of many, many jobs, and is fairly dynamic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

[icebraining]

Removing a specific job from the market is not necessarily hurting local labor; that depends on the overall effects of immigration. Take a person who comes here on a visa, manages to stay and starts a company which employs other engineers - is s/he hurting the local labor market? What about the person who simply is a great worker and allows the company to grow and hire faster?

In any case, software engineers complaining about having less jobs just strikes me as hypocritical. Our whole professions are essentially centered about eliminating the need for human labor. At least in this case, someone is still getting paid to do the job, even if it's not someone who happened to be born with the right citizenship.

[klipt]

> every H1 is a job a citizen isn't getting

That's assuming the job market is entirely inelastic, which seems unlikely.

By that same logic, every foreigner not allowed to start a company in the US is N jobs citizens aren't getting.

[thedufer]

Okay, fine. I may have sounded as if I was trying to be precise, when in fact I'm just trying to point in the right direction.

Let's try "every H1 is a positive percentage of a job a citizen isn't getting". This doesn't require that the job market be entirely inelastic; just that the response not go in the opposite of the expected direction. The same conclusion results; said H1 hurts citizens who are also qualified for said job.

[ep103]

>I disagree with this statement

Most studies find that you are wrong though. I am sure that you and the people you know are very skilled, and worked hard to get to your current position for that reason. But overall, H1 employees are paid significantly less, and many, many firms specifically refuse to hire local talent in order to fill positions through this program.

If the visa was given to the employee, not the company, then it would be a good program. But your paragraph about how difficult / chancy it can be to switch companies is exactly why it is a failed, exploitative program.

[thrwy10]

> Most studies find that you are wrong though.

Could you paste a link to those studies (unbiased or bipartisan) to support my wrongness. I've read opinions and emotional outbursts but am yet to find concrete evidence to support it. Until then I go by my own experience.

Yes, there are firms that get blanket visas. Yes, there are some people who deliberately abuse this sytem. But that is a generalization of few examples.Yes, giving visas to the employee rather than employer is better (Canadian, Australian systems is are an example). DOL's PERM process is what makes it more exploitative than not and is rampant with abuse. That needs to change, the H1 on its own is not indentured servitude.

[LordHumungous]

As a critic oh H1B's, I should be careful to point out that I have nothing against the holders of H1B's, many of whom are outstanding people. My problem has to do with a system that artificially limits the bargaining ability of one sector of labor. The solution is better treatment of H1B immigrants, not xenophobic responses.