32 ms·
Here is the summary straight from the horses mouth: https://lofgren.house.gov/uploadedfiles/high_skilled_bill_sxs_and_analysis_-1-2017__final.pdf https://lofgre
by ones_and_zeros 10y ago
Here is the summary straight from the horses mouth: https://lofgren.house.gov/uploadedfiles/high_skilled_bill_sxs_and_analysis_-1-2017__final.pdf https://lofgren.house.gov/uploadedfiles/high_skilled_bill_sx...
A few points:
- This does not raise the salary requirement to $130k/yr. This only applies to employers that do not want to do the extra paper work for "attestations regarding recruitment and non-displacement of U.S. workers"
- It takes a "market based" allocation strategy which allows "cash bonuses and similar compensation" to be included. This is a joke.
- Startups and small businesses will get 20% of the visas. It'll be interesting to see how this is gamed
- This does not fix the Corporate/Higher Ed partnership loophole
- This does not fix the power imbalance between visa holders and employers
I personally don't see this bill going anywhere. Zoe just needs to look like she is doing something.
- lokithor 10y agoYup. The fact that compensation is included, is useless. Companies give you unvested shares worth tonnes that take > 4 years to fully vest. The attrition rates are so high, the sweat shops can get away with it.
- BhavdeepSethi 10y agoNone of the sweat shops offer equity.
- lokithor 10y agoAbsolutely! I completely agree. But what stops the consultancies from doing this without actually ever letting it to fully vest?
- webmaven 10y agoWell, that can change, especially if the "equity" is in a worthless employing subsidiary that never turns a profit or has a liquidity event.
- masklinn 10y agoStartups offer equity, consulting companies don't. That would actually tend to favor startups as the equity they grant drives the "compensation" upwards despite it being monopoly money until the shares actually vest and assuming they're even worth printing at this point.
- lokithor 10y agoAbsolutely! I completely agree. But what stops the consultancies from doing this without actually ever letting it to fully vest?
- ajmurmann 10y agoSame for the cash bonuses. All the workers might underperform and never see the bonus.
- sokoloff 10y agoHere's where software people find "loopholes" like they're looking for edge case bugs in code. Suppose Tata pulls exactly what you describe. Do you think that stands a half a chance in hell of standing up to scrutiny by DoL?
- ajmurmann 10y agoThat's interesting. So the laws aren't being taken literally?
- sokoloff 10y agoThey are generally not treated as executable code written in English, but rather are interpreted taking into account the facts and circumstances. If Tata has hundreds of employees, all making $80K and a $50K bonus, none earning the bonus due to poor individual performance, but all being retained by the company and sent on new client engagements (presumably due to acceptable performance). In finance, this is often referred to as substance over form, but the same concept applies in other areas of civil law as well.
- umanwizard 10y agoUnvested RSUs aren't counted as compensation, at least for tax purposes.
- cobookman 10y agoSometimes I wish we could just fine Tata for going against the spirit of the h1b law. If its a large enough fine they might stop their shenanigans.
- koheripbal 10y agoTata is just one of MANY similar companies.
- conanbatt 10y agoYou dont need to fine Tata, you need to make it not a lottery, reduce restrictions and then let anyone who wants to do it do it.
- mavelikara 10y agoIf you get $1,000,000 worth of equity that vests in 100 years, your annual stock compensation is still $10,000.
- trishume 10y agoI grant you this is in fact not the perfect reform bill, the question is, is it better than the current situation? To me it looks like it's at least somewhat better, so as a Canadian who may want to move to the US at some point, I'm hoping it passes.
- mhurron 10y ago> so as a Canadian who may want to move to the US at some point, I'm hoping it passes. Why would it affect you?
- theonemind 10y agoYou quote the part that explains it. It looks like it might affect him as someone who might move to the US at some point. It might affect him. Large, successful insurance companies work on the notion of probability. It does bear taking into account.
- mhurron 10y agoA Canadian would come in under a TN visa which is not a lottery, not H1-B.
- foldr 10y agoNo route to permanent residency via the TN visa. With the status of NAFTA up in the air now that Trump's in power, that's potentially a pretty big deal.
- twayamznacct 10y agoThere's no real route, no, but you can take the EB Green Card path. You just can't leave the country from the period starting when you file for adjustment of status and ending when you get EAD/AP (otherwise you're never coming back in under TN status again and will likely get banned for a few years :P)
- 10y ago
- thr1234567 10y ago^This. Thanks for taking the time to dig through the legislation. I wish news articles were this critical.
- anondon 10y agoI get the impression that this new bill is like putting lipstick on a pig which is the current system. I was hoping the amendments to the H1-B bill would be one of the silver linings of a Trump presidency, but I guess not anymore.
- goldmouth 10y agoThis is a proposed bill by California democrat Zoe Lofgren. Thankfully it has zero chance of passing.
- winter_blue 10y agoI've commented on this before, at: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13433540 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13433540 I'm copying the comment below: --- I'm on an H-1B, and the thing that infuriates me about the dialogue on this is that they are effectively trying to ban skilled immigration, and exclude people like me from coming. If you don't qualify for the family-based or refugee route, employment-based immigration is the only viable pathway. The amount of hate I see piled on people trying to come here via the employment-based immigration seems insane to me. These people make it seem like employment-based immigration is not as respectable or legitimate, compared to refugee/asylum and family-based immigration. The problem with requiring higher wagers is that for people like me, who were students in US -- it's very hard to get an ultra-high salary for the first job out of college. (I did my undergrad here, and I don't have a Master's.) I was a student (on an F-1 visa), and my first job out of college offered me $60,000/year. On my first job on my H-1B visa (in NYC), I was offered $85,000 a year (got slightly over $100,000 with bonuses). Then, just about a year and half later, I was paid (incl. lucky cash bonuses) slightly over $200,000 in a single year. (My base salary is $130,000 now.) If you raised wage requirements, you'd basically be not allowing people like me to continue to stay and work in the US (after graduation from college), and would instead only allow people from outside who have lots of experience (and skill) and can command a much higher salary upfront. --- It's very disappointing to see the level of vitriol directed towards people who are just trying to build a better life in this country, especially here on HN.
- jessaustin 10y ago
- gregw2 10y agoThank you. Good points. Is anybody working on a better bill?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- koolba 10y ago> - Startups and small businesses will get 20% of the visas. It'll be interesting to see how this is gamed Probably the old fashioned way: Tata Startup Services, a wholly owned subsidiary of Tata Consulting Services.
- geodel 10y agoYep. When money is to be made they need no invitation.
- ansible 10y agoSomeone will be using a "startup company name" generator for these wholly owned subsidiaries and be filling out the paperwork for 50 of them all at the same time. No doubt to get a discount on the legal fees.
- derefr 10y agoIs there a simple way to say in legalese "we want startups, but not 1. startups that have large companies as controlling interests at any remove, or 2. startups who exist to serve only one or two large companies"? Sure, you'd exclude a few enterprise-B2B startups from your program, and startups that have been invested in "over a barrel" such that the founders no longer retain control, but you'd also filter out these ne'er-do-wells.
- st3v3r 10y agoNot really, which is why I generally oppose special rules for startups. No way to make sure that it's bona fide startups using them.
- user5994461 10y agoBreaking news: The name generator is available there https://www.dotomator.com/web20.html https://www.dotomator.com/web20.html
- apazzolini 10y agoSounds like automating creating startups and filling out paperwork for H1-Bs is a good idea for a startup.
- tomp 10y ago- It takes a "market based" allocation strategy which allows "cash bonuses and similar compensation" to be included. This is a joke. Honest question, why is this a joke?
- msujaws 10y agoEmployer-provided healthcare is considered compensation, and the "cost" is somewhat determined at will depending on creative accounting.
- kgwgk 10y agoHow is it so? I'd say there are real dollars going to the healthcare providers.
- Mvandenbergh 10y agoIt relies on the companies own estimate of the value of those bonuses... but bonuses are discretionary and the value of private company stock can be hard to determine. So you could have a salary of $90k, $10k of healthcare benefits, and $30k worth of "assumed" bonuses in the form of options, restricted shares, etc. which: a) you're not certain to get anyway (because they're bonuses) b) might not really be worth $30k
- mavelikara 10y ago> the value of private company stock can be hard to determine The IRS uses 409A valuation. These valuations have been high enough to cause huge AMT burden to engineers. Sam Altman etc have written about it; Zoe Lofgren herself has been trying for years to fix it. Why do you think it is a joke?
- KirinDave 10y agoIt is awful when you get hit by this. Modern tax law absolutely wrecks startup founders who are not already rich. It's quite stunning.
- squozzer 10y ago>attestations regarding recruitment Isn't the compliance enforcement budget zeroed out?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- itissid 10y agoI think the shortest fix for the violation part(Corporate/Ed tech loophole and the Implementation/Consultant loophole) is some boots on the ground for DHS to investigate worksites. If there is enough economic incentive vested in any one area, sooner or later people will game it. And the H1B business is very lucrative. Putting in oversight to such a thing is hard without boots on the ground/human resources. AFAIR Visa program is run entirely on applicant fees making to slapstick to a bill even a harder sell given how much congress frowns upon spending.
- __derek__ 10y agoGiven what "boots on the ground" typically means for federal agencies (i.e. armed raids), your suggestion makes me twitchy.
- smsm42 10y agoYou don't need armed raid to audit visa compliance. You need one bespectacled guy with a briefcase. It's true that most of the US law enforcement wants to look like military and tries to use armed troops way out of proportion (I mean, Library of Congress and Department of Education have their owned armed response units, because regular police isn't tough enough to deal with education issues anymore, apparently) - but I hope it's possible to avoid going full Steven Seagal in this case.
- __derek__ 10y agoYou're right that it would be possible with something akin to a health department visit, but need rarely has anything to do with armed raids.
- tn13 10y ago> DHS to investigate worksites This is not a man in suite arriving at site via Uber asking polite questions. This is mostly a SWAT team storming through all doors and killing dogs if any an then taking away all your documents, interviewing all employees. In short that is end of business to you. Remember they will not come alone. They will bring sleuths from all other departments and you will be fined for not having appropriate number of fire extinguishers and for not having a separate bin for dry cells. You clients will avoid you and your landlord will be upset.
- cmurf 10y agoBloomberg suggests this is going to get upstaged by the administration's proposed changes; but they're not really revealing any details about the draft. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/trump-s-next-move-on-immigration-to-hit-closer-to-home-for-tech https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/trump-s-n... This months old Vanity Fair article gives some insight that Trump feels there is a role for immigration policy to make it easy for foreign students getting good jobs in the U.S. and innovating here; while his senior counselor and strategist thinks there are too many asians in Silicon Valley, and that it risks degrading civil society. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/trump-s-next-move-on-immigration-to-hit-closer-to-home-for-tech https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/trump-s-n... But most any substantial change to immigration policy that isn't national security related, must come from Congress.
- jackweirdy 10y agoIt looks like you posted the Bloomberg link again the second time, not the Vanity Fair link
- cmurf 10y agoRats. Here it is. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/steve-bannon-racist-comments-silicon-valley-inaccurate http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/steve-bannon-racist-c...
- drzaiusapelord 10y ago>while his senior counselor and strategist thinks there are too many asians in Silicon Valley The idea that you can have "too many" of any type of person is about an un-american as one can be. Somehow Trump has no problem with 'too many' chubby white supremacists in the white house. Oh right, whites get a pass on everything. Its only non-whites that have to worry about being too high profile or too successful as to not upset whites. Or dating/marrying white women. This is straight up racism, open and direct from the white house. I'm not sure how anyone is tolerating this and why there isn't more of an uproar.
- 10y ago
- webmaven 10y ago> Startups and small businesses will get 20% of the visas. It'll be interesting to see how this is gamed Probably in exactly the same ways Federal contracts are gamed.
- jugg1es 10y agoThank for the summary and link. I was about to have a heart attack.
- gautambay 10y agoThanks for this! I've been on multiple H1B visas, at both large companies and startups. I've also sponsored H1B visas as an employer. I would support this bill. The headline is a classic example of sensational journalism by the Times of India. The $130k salary requirement applies only to "dependent employers", defined as employers with over 15% of their workforce on H1Bs. This is clearly aimed at reducing H1B misuse by TCS, Infosys, and their ilk. The vast majority of companies who employ people on H1Bs aren't "dependent" employers by this definition, and hence will be unaffected by the salary increase rule. If anything, they'll benefit from more visas being available to non-dependent employers. Also, startups will likely benefit from the 20% requirement.
- deeth_starr 10y agoAnd Samsung US. They pay H1B's absolute crap. This would be a good thing for them.
- serge2k 10y agohttp://www.h1bdata.info/index.php?em=samsung&job=&city=&year=All+Years http://www.h1bdata.info/index.php?em=samsung&job=&city=&year... Just a glance, doesn't seem that bad.
- deeth_starr 10y agoYou're including Austin, TX (Semiconductor) in that search. Their CA engineer salaries are much lower. Also, I wonder about that data. I've seen bigger CA databases that have more records and lower salaries. Also, look at what AirBNB pays their H1B's. http://www.h1bdata.info/index.php?em=SAMSUNG+RESEARCH+AMERICA+INC&job=ENGINEER&city=&year=ALL+YEARS http://www.h1bdata.info/index.php?em=SAMSUNG+RESEARCH+AMERIC... Edit: Sorry, going to retract this. My data is a few years old. It seems like they have started paying market rates. http://h1bpay.com/salaries?company=samsung+&city=mountain+view&job-title= http://h1bpay.com/salaries?company=samsung+&city=mountain+vi...
- electrichead 10y agoAlthough a startup might only marginally benefit because a single one would be a significant portion of their employees, right? So it would be over 15% right off the bat if they have fewer than 7 people
- tracker1 10y agoThanks for pointing these things out... I've been saying for a few years now, that H1Bs should have a salary floor of 8-12x minimum wage, or the top 10-15% income bracket... given that it's supposed to be for specialized technical skills that aren't able to be found domestically.
- wahsd 10y ago"...how this will be gamed". Maybe just spin off little small business divisions that happen to be in the very same office they were in before? It should have been made an across the board, minimum $150k adjusted for inflation and a default requirement of $200k. I realize the following is not going to be popular here , but people don't take into account how much these programs and illegal immigration are destroying the fabric of America because it allows politicians and corporations to ignore our problems in education and the economy. With every foreign H1B worker you are depriving a child that could and should have been educated to have filled that position. But instead, politicians and corporations ignored the issue and left poor kids to fester amid Democrat and big business policies (including Google and Microsoft) of welfare and immigration that undermines their community's growth and development. They have been trapped in a welfare bubble by Democrats and establishment GOP by selling them and America out to foreigners. I know that's not what foreign YC readers want to hear, but these H1B visas and illegal immigration, and even excessive legal immigration are wreaking havoc in our society. We will never sole the education problem and never progress if we keep living on credit by importing other people to make it look like we are still successful. The detritus is starting to pile up no matter how much you slap new paint on it.