2 ms·

> All the new proposed legislation will do is drive up wages (and therefore income inequality) for both Americans and H1-B holders. It will also allow the big f

by vostok 10y ago

> All the new proposed legislation will do is drive up wages (and therefore income inequality) for both Americans and H1-B holders. It will also allow the big firms to shed their worse employees and hold on to only their best, thereby making it incredibly difficult for smaller competitors and public entities to find staff. Anecdotal, but I work for a small company and this would make it easier for us to find staff. Right now, huge companies like Cognizant, Tata & Infosys submit a huge amount of H1B applications. The lottery system means that small companies like my own simply cannot get H1B visas. Something like an auction system would actually benefit us because we pay engineers competitively compared to the best paying large companies and a lot more than most large companies.

hiram112 10y ago
Maybe you're unable to find employees because you aren't willing to pay the market price. What's a software engineer worth? Well I guess, like every other industry, it's the amount that starts getting a lot of interest in your position. Offer $200K and I bet you'll have a dozen devs from this forum knocking down your door.
- vostok 10y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your comment. It is not obvious to my why you think that we underpay. Can you help me understand by elaborating? We just end up hiring people who already have some form of work authorization instead of sponsoring new H1Bs. The current system for sponsoring new H1Bs is dominated by large companies. The lottery system means that we do not even attempt to sponsor new H1Bs. An auction system would mean that our small company would probably get approved H1Bs because, as I mentioned, our pay is competitive with the best paying large companies and higher than the majority of large companies.
  - pm90 10y ago
    I think he is referring to citizen hires. i.e. offer more money for the job and US citizens with the right qualifications will magically appear at your door. It is a rather simplistic view of how the labor market works, but some people can't seem to not think this way.
    - vostok 10y ago
      I mean right now we hire people who already have work authorization. Right now we can't sponsor a foreign new grad who goes to Cambridge and has an IMO gold medal because their H1B has a high probability of not being approved. We'll lose time interviewing and we'll probably lose other candidates while we wait. If H1Bs were allocated by pay then our H1B would probably get approved because we're really desperate to make those hires. Instead those visas go to megacorps who are not as desperate as we are. How do I know that they are not as desperate? They pay less. We are so desperate to make these hires that we are opening an office in a jurisdiction with friendlier immigration laws. This is extremely expensive in terms of direct costs. I also think we lose out on ad-hoc communication by not having everyone in the same office. The net effect is that the US loses out on a ton of tax revenue. Not only will the employees' personal taxes go to a different country, but taxes on some our profits will also shift to that country as the company will have to make transfer payments for the work done in the overseas office.
- SilasX 10y ago
  No, the key problem is that the big contracting sweatshops are able to muscle out far more deserving applications from employers who are in fact willing to pay a lot more. See the salaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13362123 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13362123 I'm pretty sure the parent was willing to pay more than the $76k that Infosys offers -- an amount that pretty much proves that H1Bs aren't being used to find the "super rare talent" that the program is ostensibly for. That's why we should go toward a highest-bidder system. No need for the government to try to learn the difference between DB admins and deep learning specialists, and it would ensure that the slots are going to the immigrants creating the most economic value, rather than the ones best at pretending to look real hard for qualified Americans.

by vostok 10y ago

hiram112 10y ago

Maybe you're unable to find employees because you aren't willing to pay the market price. What's a software engineer worth? Well I guess, like every other industry, it's the amount that starts getting a lot of interest in your position. Offer $200K and I bet you'll have a dozen devs from this forum knocking down your door.

vostok 10y ago
I'm not sure I understand your comment. It is not obvious to my why you think that we underpay. Can you help me understand by elaborating? We just end up hiring people who already have some form of work authorization instead of sponsoring new H1Bs. The current system for sponsoring new H1Bs is dominated by large companies. The lottery system means that we do not even attempt to sponsor new H1Bs. An auction system would mean that our small company would probably get approved H1Bs because, as I mentioned, our pay is competitive with the best paying large companies and higher than the majority of large companies.
- pm90 10y ago
  I think he is referring to citizen hires. i.e. offer more money for the job and US citizens with the right qualifications will magically appear at your door. It is a rather simplistic view of how the labor market works, but some people can't seem to not think this way.
  - vostok 10y ago
    I mean right now we hire people who already have work authorization. Right now we can't sponsor a foreign new grad who goes to Cambridge and has an IMO gold medal because their H1B has a high probability of not being approved. We'll lose time interviewing and we'll probably lose other candidates while we wait. If H1Bs were allocated by pay then our H1B would probably get approved because we're really desperate to make those hires. Instead those visas go to megacorps who are not as desperate as we are. How do I know that they are not as desperate? They pay less. We are so desperate to make these hires that we are opening an office in a jurisdiction with friendlier immigration laws. This is extremely expensive in terms of direct costs. I also think we lose out on ad-hoc communication by not having everyone in the same office. The net effect is that the US loses out on a ton of tax revenue. Not only will the employees' personal taxes go to a different country, but taxes on some our profits will also shift to that country as the company will have to make transfer payments for the work done in the overseas office.
SilasX 10y ago
No, the key problem is that the big contracting sweatshops are able to muscle out far more deserving applications from employers who are in fact willing to pay a lot more. See the salaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13362123 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13362123 I'm pretty sure the parent was willing to pay more than the $76k that Infosys offers -- an amount that pretty much proves that H1Bs aren't being used to find the "super rare talent" that the program is ostensibly for. That's why we should go toward a highest-bidder system. No need for the government to try to learn the difference between DB admins and deep learning specialists, and it would ensure that the slots are going to the immigrants creating the most economic value, rather than the ones best at pretending to look real hard for qualified Americans.