8 ms·

I was on H1B with a true blue American startup. They developed cold feet when it came closer to sponsoring Green Cards. To start with GC wage levels are much hi

I was on H1B with a true blue American startup. They developed cold feet when it came closer to sponsoring Green Cards. To start with GC wage levels are much higher than H1B levels. Also close to 15K+ needs to be spent for processing+ years of patient follow up to USCIS queries/denials and surprise site inspections. The new fangled startups won't have the long term strategy/planning to get me a green card. I had much better luck with a staffing vendor running an office off his basement. People misunderstand the H1B outsourcer lock-in. They hold people in through green card processes/delays. Not through H1B itself. Google for Employment based GC delays for Indians and Chinese.

harichinnan 11y ago
You can help end this by supporting legislation. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213 https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213
- Someone1234 11y ago
  That legislation has absolutely nothing to do with employers helping their employees gain a green card. It just redistributes the H1Bs differently. Did you reply to the right post?
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    If the H1Bs are distributed differently, couldn't employees move to the employers who are willing to help them? This benefits helpful employers. Seems right.
    - Someone1234 11y ago
      It doesn't distribute them to different employers, it distributes them to different countries. Not the same thing at all. There's no reason at all to think that anything would change in terms of the H1B Vs. employer relationship if that legislation would pass. We'd just have different nationalities in the same situation we do now.
      - harichinnan 11y ago
        Concentrating the delays and therefore the abuse to two countries created the IT outsourcing monsters you have now(search for TCS, Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant...) . Distributing the delays would therefore create smaller companies with a more diverse workforce and therefore would level out the H1B wage gap. Think of disrupting the status quo..
  - harichinnan 11y ago
    Look at the chart below. This should explain why H1B employees(Mostly Indians and Chinese) stick with their outsourcers. The legislation would help resolve the backlog. http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bulletin/2016/visa-bulletin-for-december-2015.html http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bull...
    - Someone1234 11y ago
      Which chart? And the person above was talking about how few employers will go through the green card process, that page appears to be about H1B approvals, which is outside the scope of what they said.
      - moey 11y ago
        I think harichinnan meant to reply to shas3's post.
- winter_blue 11y ago
  That bill does not increase the number of employment-based immigrant visas/greencards -- it just eliminates the 7% per-country limit. In my opinion, it's a poor piece of legislation. The I-Square Act does a much better job at improving the terrible skilled immigration system: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s153 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s153 The best bill so far that Congress has introduced in the last ten years was S. 744 (113th Congress), which passed the Senate, but was blocked by then House Speaker Boehner (despite majority support in the House) under pressure from some racist and xenophobic far-right republicans: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s744 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s744
Someone1234 11y ago
That's totally how they do it. The whole thing is abusive as heck, but for a lot of H1Bs it is still their best chance at a better life. Fortunately a lot of H1Bs wind up getting change of status another way (e.g. getting married). But for those that don't, it must feel like they're in bonded labor to that employer.
jordanb 11y ago
Yeah check out this website made by immigration lawyers: http://hiref-1students.com/ http://hiref-1students.com/ They explicitly sell the advantage to hiring people on visa as being the control you have over them during the green card process.
boulos 11y ago
I'm sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, the Green Card sponsorship process is way more involved (AFAICT) and with much longer time-to-completion. I'd personally find it hard to believe that a startup would be able to take you through the whole process, given the probability they're out of business within a year or so. Similarly, once you start the Green Card process with an employer, you aren't likely to go through with an H1-B transfer. It's a broken system...
shas3 11y ago
No country is allowed to get more than 7% of the green cards each year (roughly speaking). This GC-H1B lock-in problem is very unique to Indians (~10 year wait), and to a lesser extent, Chinese (~4 year wait). The 7% quota would be illegal were it applied to US citizenship, according to civil rights legislations of the 1960s (prior to which non-whites were discriminated against in naturalized-citizenships via quotas). However, unlike pre-civil rights citizenship quotas, the green card quota seems ok to everyone. This a moral discrepancy, IMO. Unfortunately, it won't be addressed in the near future, because though the population affected may be in the hundreds of thousands, they are not important to any political players. Even on a generally enlightened forum like HN, you routinely encounter hateful comments about H1B workers. I think H1Bs deserve some level of representation in such matters simply because these workers pay the exact same taxes as all Americans. The situation for many people is utterly hopeless and it should be of humanitarian concern, here is a moving account from Seattle: http://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/while-their-husbands-work-immigrant-wives-often-struggle-in-this-new-land/ http://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/while-their-... I think the notion that after working (and paying taxes) in the US for 6 years, a person has to wait another 10 years to reap the benefits of permanent residency simply because they were born in a particular country is morally indefensible.
- bradleyjg 11y ago
  Although the per country limits hit India and Chinese born beneficiaries in employment based preference categories the worst, there is also a waiting list for Filipinos in employment based third and other workers. In the family based categories, Mexicans and Filipinos generally have the longest waits, with Mexican family first preference (i.e. unmarried children of US citizens) in December 1994 and Filipino fourth preference (i.e. siblings of US citizens) in June 1992 vs. 2008 and 2003 for those categories generally.
  - shas3 11y ago
    Right! There is one across-the-board solution that occurs to me, let's say, the US has an overall cap of 40,000 for employment based preference category, 2800 each are max caps for Indians and Chinese. Because of the 7% quota, I would expect at least some, let's say, M of the 40,000 are left unclaimed. So why can't they take M unfulfilled slots and redistribute that to clear the China/India backlog? You can think of the same for EB3, and family petitions too. This would be more equitable than 7% quotas. Edit: I did back of the envelope calculations based on this data: http://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms-data/data-set-form-i-485-application-adjustment-status http://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms... For the last year, there are about 120k applications approved, while 140k is the limit. At the end of the year, the remaining 20k can be split up among people in the queue. This can be made even fairer if you aggregate it over two years, and then tie the number of immigrants to the inflation rate. I estimate it would shave off at least 3-5 years from the current wait times for EB petitions. It can even be tied to the percentage of the country's population that got an H1B. There are some more trends here: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42048.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42048.pdf
bsder 11y ago
> To start with GC wage levels are much higher than H1B levels. And that exactly defines the problem and why US citizens, in general, hate the H1-B program. The solution to the H1-B program is to transition H1-B's to green cards in 12 months. The company sponsoring the H1-B is responsible executing the paperwork, background checks, and posting a bond to fund the spot checks, investigations, etc. H1-B sponsors will drop through the floor. However, companies that genuinely want the specific person will continue to be just fine.
- dimdimdim 11y ago
  This will cause "labor abandonment" and put more pressure on the economy. Here is an example --- a company uses a worked for just 1-2 years, sponsors his green card and then fires him. Now if he cannot find a job then if he were on the previous H1B, then he will have to leave the US. However, now, he can stay without a job with no risk of removal, which means he is a liability to the country.
  - bsder 11y ago
    I'm having a difficult time parsing your grammar, so I'm not sure what you are trying to explain. > This will cause "labor abandonment" and put more pressure on the economy. There is no evidence that companies are having trouble finding workers outside of Silicon Valley. Precisely the opposite, they are laying off people. Companies don't fire a person who suddenly has a green card. That person voluntarily leaves for a better job.

harichinnan 11y ago

You can help end this by supporting legislation. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213 https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213

Someone1234 11y ago
That legislation has absolutely nothing to do with employers helping their employees gain a green card. It just redistributes the H1Bs differently. Did you reply to the right post?
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  If the H1Bs are distributed differently, couldn't employees move to the employers who are willing to help them? This benefits helpful employers. Seems right.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    It doesn't distribute them to different employers, it distributes them to different countries. Not the same thing at all. There's no reason at all to think that anything would change in terms of the H1B Vs. employer relationship if that legislation would pass. We'd just have different nationalities in the same situation we do now.
    - harichinnan 11y ago
      Concentrating the delays and therefore the abuse to two countries created the IT outsourcing monsters you have now(search for TCS, Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant...) . Distributing the delays would therefore create smaller companies with a more diverse workforce and therefore would level out the H1B wage gap. Think of disrupting the status quo..
- harichinnan 11y ago
  Look at the chart below. This should explain why H1B employees(Mostly Indians and Chinese) stick with their outsourcers. The legislation would help resolve the backlog. http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bulletin/2016/visa-bulletin-for-december-2015.html http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bull...
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    Which chart? And the person above was talking about how few employers will go through the green card process, that page appears to be about H1B approvals, which is outside the scope of what they said.
    - moey 11y ago
      I think harichinnan meant to reply to shas3's post.
winter_blue 11y ago
That bill does not increase the number of employment-based immigrant visas/greencards -- it just eliminates the 7% per-country limit. In my opinion, it's a poor piece of legislation. The I-Square Act does a much better job at improving the terrible skilled immigration system: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s153 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s153 The best bill so far that Congress has introduced in the last ten years was S. 744 (113th Congress), which passed the Senate, but was blocked by then House Speaker Boehner (despite majority support in the House) under pressure from some racist and xenophobic far-right republicans: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s744 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s744

Someone1234 11y ago

That's totally how they do it. The whole thing is abusive as heck, but for a lot of H1Bs it is still their best chance at a better life. Fortunately a lot of H1Bs wind up getting change of status another way (e.g. getting married). But for those that don't, it must feel like they're in bonded labor to that employer.

jordanb 11y ago

Yeah check out this website made by immigration lawyers: http://hiref-1students.com/ http://hiref-1students.com/ They explicitly sell the advantage to hiring people on visa as being the control you have over them during the green card process.

boulos 11y ago

I'm sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, the Green Card sponsorship process is way more involved (AFAICT) and with much longer time-to-completion. I'd personally find it hard to believe that a startup would be able to take you through the whole process, given the probability they're out of business within a year or so. Similarly, once you start the Green Card process with an employer, you aren't likely to go through with an H1-B transfer. It's a broken system...

shas3 11y ago

No country is allowed to get more than 7% of the green cards each year (roughly speaking). This GC-H1B lock-in problem is very unique to Indians (~10 year wait), and to a lesser extent, Chinese (~4 year wait). The 7% quota would be illegal were it applied to US citizenship, according to civil rights legislations of the 1960s (prior to which non-whites were discriminated against in naturalized-citizenships via quotas). However, unlike pre-civil rights citizenship quotas, the green card quota seems ok to everyone. This a moral discrepancy, IMO. Unfortunately, it won't be addressed in the near future, because though the population affected may be in the hundreds of thousands, they are not important to any political players. Even on a generally enlightened forum like HN, you routinely encounter hateful comments about H1B workers. I think H1Bs deserve some level of representation in such matters simply because these workers pay the exact same taxes as all Americans. The situation for many people is utterly hopeless and it should be of humanitarian concern, here is a moving account from Seattle: http://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/while-their-husbands-work-immigrant-wives-often-struggle-in-this-new-land/ http://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/while-their-... I think the notion that after working (and paying taxes) in the US for 6 years, a person has to wait another 10 years to reap the benefits of permanent residency simply because they were born in a particular country is morally indefensible.

bradleyjg 11y ago
Although the per country limits hit India and Chinese born beneficiaries in employment based preference categories the worst, there is also a waiting list for Filipinos in employment based third and other workers. In the family based categories, Mexicans and Filipinos generally have the longest waits, with Mexican family first preference (i.e. unmarried children of US citizens) in December 1994 and Filipino fourth preference (i.e. siblings of US citizens) in June 1992 vs. 2008 and 2003 for those categories generally.
- shas3 11y ago
  Right! There is one across-the-board solution that occurs to me, let's say, the US has an overall cap of 40,000 for employment based preference category, 2800 each are max caps for Indians and Chinese. Because of the 7% quota, I would expect at least some, let's say, M of the 40,000 are left unclaimed. So why can't they take M unfulfilled slots and redistribute that to clear the China/India backlog? You can think of the same for EB3, and family petitions too. This would be more equitable than 7% quotas. Edit: I did back of the envelope calculations based on this data: http://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms-data/data-set-form-i-485-application-adjustment-status http://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms... For the last year, there are about 120k applications approved, while 140k is the limit. At the end of the year, the remaining 20k can be split up among people in the queue. This can be made even fairer if you aggregate it over two years, and then tie the number of immigrants to the inflation rate. I estimate it would shave off at least 3-5 years from the current wait times for EB petitions. It can even be tied to the percentage of the country's population that got an H1B. There are some more trends here: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42048.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42048.pdf

bsder 11y ago

> To start with GC wage levels are much higher than H1B levels. And that exactly defines the problem and why US citizens, in general, hate the H1-B program. The solution to the H1-B program is to transition H1-B's to green cards in 12 months. The company sponsoring the H1-B is responsible executing the paperwork, background checks, and posting a bond to fund the spot checks, investigations, etc. H1-B sponsors will drop through the floor. However, companies that genuinely want the specific person will continue to be just fine.

dimdimdim 11y ago
This will cause "labor abandonment" and put more pressure on the economy. Here is an example --- a company uses a worked for just 1-2 years, sponsors his green card and then fires him. Now if he cannot find a job then if he were on the previous H1B, then he will have to leave the US. However, now, he can stay without a job with no risk of removal, which means he is a liability to the country.
- bsder 11y ago
  I'm having a difficult time parsing your grammar, so I'm not sure what you are trying to explain. > This will cause "labor abandonment" and put more pressure on the economy. There is no evidence that companies are having trouble finding workers outside of Silicon Valley. Precisely the opposite, they are laying off people. Companies don't fire a person who suddenly has a green card. That person voluntarily leaves for a better job.