6 ms·

The title is a bit misleading. This directive seems to target 3rd party H-1B contractors such as Tata and Infosys, rather than 'High Tech' companies that direct

The title is a bit misleading. This directive seems to target 3rd party H-1B contractors such as Tata and Infosys, rather than 'High Tech' companies that directly hire engineers such as Google, Apple, and Microsoft. Companies that hire H-1Bs directly and employ them onsite shouldn't be affected by this policy change. I think the linked CNN Money article provides a better explanation of the motives behind this change http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/23/technology/h1b-visa-abuse/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/23/technology/h1b-visa-abuse/in...

adamrezich 9y ago
In my experience attempting to get an entry-level programming job at Microsoft (while I lived in the area), they get a lot of hires through hiring agencies, all of whom ask you what your legal residence status is as their first question (which I have to say is highly discouraging when being unable to score an entry-level CS job in one's own country).
- s2g 9y ago
  Well, not much point in continuing if they find out you aren't going to be able to work for them.
- mancerayder 9y ago
  I've never not been asked my residence status, ever, in direct or agency hires, in my entire career. It's most likely (almost certainly) a legal obligation. Each time I had to furnish a SS card as well. A non-citizen SS card has a disclaimer on it saying it's not valid for work authorization alone.
  - HarryHirsch 9y ago
    I've never not been asked my residence status, ever, in direct or agency hires, in my entire career You probably have been asked for documentation that gives you permission to work. The Department of Labor has a list somewhere (can't find it right now) of what constitutes a work permit, and the employer has to accept anything that conforms. My wife ran into a particularly obstinate HR drone once who wouldn't accept what she had. She asked company counsel if her documentation was in order and received a phonecall from HR to please come in and sign paperwork before the day was over. Yes, federal law has teeth.
    - theandrewbailey 9y ago
      It's not the Department of Labor, it's the Department of Homeland Security. https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents/list-documents/form-i-9-acceptable-documents https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents/list-...
  - sudouser 9y ago
    lucky you
    - dang 9y ago
      Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- walshemj 9y ago
  That's pretty much standard for all recruitment agencies in the USA and EU as they want to avoid being fined heavily. I am not sure but in the UK employing some one without the legal right to work has no defence even if they had perfectly forged passports/documents. I had to (as some one with all 4 grandparents being natural born uk citizens) have had to take my birth certificate to register at a local high street agency.
- plorkyeran 9y ago
  I'm not sure what's supposed to be notable about that? The only company I've ever interviewed with that didn't ask what my legal residence status was very early on in the process was a startup with a poor understanding of employment law. You can't assume that people who can't actually legally work for you won't apply for jobs anyway and asking it later would just waste your time.
- jameshart 9y ago
  The question employers are supposed to ask is whether you are legally authorized to work; 'residence status' is not relevant (and indeed you could get into trouble for refusing to hire someone who is authorized to work on the basis of their visa/residence status).
  - nocman 9y ago
    Well, I guess it depends on the actual wording that was used, and I'm by no expert on the subject (by any stretch of the imagination). However, some visa's require sponsorship, and as far as I know it is perfectly legal to not hire someone if they are in the process of getting (or are planning to get) a visa that requires a sponsor -- in other words, they are expecting your company to sponsor them. There are financial and legal reasons why a company might not hire you if you were in this situation. There is more hassle for the company, and additional expense. They may or may not think any particular candidate is worth the additional hassle and expense. So it is a perfectly legitimate question to ask ( again, assuming it is asked in an appropritate manner ).
    - jameshart 9y ago
      Right - if you need a sponsored visa to work then, until you have that sponsorship, you are not authorized to work in the US. So if you ask someone this question, and they answer ‘no’, then if you really want to hire them anyway you can look into sponsoring them for a visa. But if they answer ‘yes’ (and provide the necessary documentation to prove it), you aren’t then supposed to care how they acquired that authorization. This is complicated a little for transferable sponsored visas like the H1B. Someone already on an H1B might reply ‘yes’ to the work authorization question, but with the caveat that you would need to take on their sponsorship. Technically, their answer should be ‘no’. They aren’t authorized to work for anyone other than their sponsoring employer, in a specific location, with a specific job title. As I say, the point is that if the answer is ‘yes’, not ‘yes but’, or ‘no’, then you’re not permitted to discriminate. Asking someone with work authorization questions about their visa type should be as much of an interview no-no as asking a candidate if she’s pregnant. Only exception is certain jobs can place citizenship requirements because of security clearance requirements.
echevil 9y ago
Precisely! Anyone familiar with this issue would know this is actually helping major high tech companies. But to most Americans who don't really know what is the deal with immigration, why let a chance to attack Trump administration go? :)
- draw_down 9y ago
  Ugh. Right, everyone is just soooo unfair to them. Give me a break.
- wheretolive 9y ago
  This isn't going to help high tech companies. EB1-C is a Green Card category for multinational managers. It is supposed to be used to move job creating foreign nationals to US. Till 2010, the body shop and consulting companies didn't use it much. However as rule tightened since 2010, these companies started using EB1-C to most low cost labor to US and delaying Green Card for everyone else. With EB1-C you can get Green Card within an year, cutting in line in front of everyone else from India. With this ruling, these companies are going to double down on EB1-C.
  - echevil 9y ago
    Just one more thing to fix then. Even if these companies wants to double down on EB-1C, it’d still be much harder to bring in low skill tech workers as “multi-national managers”
    - DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
      I understand companies like Tata have job-titles like “Account executive” for (relatively) low-level employees which meets the “Executive-level employment” critter and rule for EB-1 classification - even though the term “executive” is clearly overloaded and inappropriate in this context.
      - jameshart 9y ago
        USCIS aren't fooled by job title inflation. Applications for these sorts of visas require substantial supporting documentation - typically org charts, detailed descriptions of responsibilities, resumes of people who report to the visa applicant, evidence of compensation commensurate with the claimed responsibilities, etc.
dang 9y ago
Ok, we've changed the URL and title to that from https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/23/588469561/trump-administration-restricts-h-1b-worker-visas-coveted-by-high-tech https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/23/588469561.... Thanks!
- yanslookup 9y ago
  The current title, implying abuse by Infosys, Tata et all is hyperbolic borderline xenophobic. If the way Infosys and Tata use the H-1B visa is abuse then so is how Microsoft, Google and Facebook use it.
  - digitalzombie 9y ago
    "Trump Administration Restricts H-1B Worker Visas Coveted By High Tech" is the title. > If the way Infosys and Tata use the H-1B visa is abuse then so is how Microsoft, Google and Facebook use it. Infosys and Tata enable companies to abuse H-1B laws. Disney use them. Your statement also imply that Microsoft, Google, and Facebook is abusing too and no difference between Infosys and Tata. There is a small difference that I've stated but all of them are abusing it. The point of contention is not that the Indians are stealing our job. The point is the people who are using H-1B visa are unable to negotiate wages which depresses their American counterpart wages.
    - product50 9y ago
      Don't generalize that Indians are stealing your jobs. Google has 1000+ eng roles open at this time - if Americans are qualified, then they can totally get all of them. The fact of the matter is that America does have talent shortage for high end tech roles. Also, this misconception that Indians are paid less for high end roles is purely that - if you are able to crack Google eng role, you will get paid $200k+ or more depending on your level. Note that I am making a distinction between Google eng roles and those tech roles which Infosys and TCS hire for. For the latter the play is cost arbitrage such as replacing Disney engineers with Indian eng who can do the same work for lower cost. However, I want you to be aware of the real talent shortage which is present there on the high end tech side.
lawnchair_larry 9y ago
Microsoft, Apple, and Google, among other big tech companies, are some of Tata and Infosys’ largest clients, so it’s not as clear cut as it might seem. They get to avoid hiring more “expensive” FTEs by using these body shops.
andy_ppp 9y ago
Is this about stopping more non-white people from coming to the US?
nonamechicken 9y ago
I think it targets the small consultancies that operate in US. This is where I have seen all the scams happening. These consultancies don't bring people from India, they hire Indians who did MS in US (I am Indian, so only know about them), mostly those on OPT. Those people are desperate for a job (if they don't get H1B within I think 18 months, they have to go back) and are willing to do anything. Most of them come to study in US after taking big bank loans and it would be a lose for them to go back if they can't work for at least 2-3 years in US. >That's when firms bring on H-1B visa holders but don't give them work and don't pay them the required wages while they wait for jobs. I can 100% guarantee that the top Indian companies do not engage in this practice. Every single one of them have a policy that if the H1B employee doesn't have a project for 2 weeks to 1 month, they must go back to India. And they get paid the full amount mentioned in their offer letter for the duration they are in US. And they are also paid for expenses that arise from having to go back to India. This includes lease breakage, air fare for the H1B holder and their family and a few other expenses. For "benching", the only exception I have seen is the Indians they hire from US. Those people get to stay on bench until the company can find a new project for them. But they are still paid in full. >if an employer can't prove the H-1B holder is "more likely than not" needed for the full three years, the government might issue the visa for fewer than three years. This has already been the case. I have seen many H1Bs getting visa approved only for 1 year.
coupdetaco 9y ago
Large software companies pay premiums. Tata, Infosys, Cognizant, et cetera are the bad actors. https://www.economist.com/news/business/21714994-it-firms-need-upgrade-face-technological-and-political-shifts-indian-outsourcing https://www.economist.com/news/business/21714994-it-firms-ne...

adamrezich 9y ago

In my experience attempting to get an entry-level programming job at Microsoft (while I lived in the area), they get a lot of hires through hiring agencies, all of whom ask you what your legal residence status is as their first question (which I have to say is highly discouraging when being unable to score an entry-level CS job in one's own country).

s2g 9y ago
Well, not much point in continuing if they find out you aren't going to be able to work for them.
mancerayder 9y ago
I've never not been asked my residence status, ever, in direct or agency hires, in my entire career. It's most likely (almost certainly) a legal obligation. Each time I had to furnish a SS card as well. A non-citizen SS card has a disclaimer on it saying it's not valid for work authorization alone.
- HarryHirsch 9y ago
  I've never not been asked my residence status, ever, in direct or agency hires, in my entire career You probably have been asked for documentation that gives you permission to work. The Department of Labor has a list somewhere (can't find it right now) of what constitutes a work permit, and the employer has to accept anything that conforms. My wife ran into a particularly obstinate HR drone once who wouldn't accept what she had. She asked company counsel if her documentation was in order and received a phonecall from HR to please come in and sign paperwork before the day was over. Yes, federal law has teeth.
  - theandrewbailey 9y ago
    It's not the Department of Labor, it's the Department of Homeland Security. https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents/list-documents/form-i-9-acceptable-documents https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents/list-...
- sudouser 9y ago
  lucky you
  - dang 9y ago
    Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
walshemj 9y ago
That's pretty much standard for all recruitment agencies in the USA and EU as they want to avoid being fined heavily. I am not sure but in the UK employing some one without the legal right to work has no defence even if they had perfectly forged passports/documents. I had to (as some one with all 4 grandparents being natural born uk citizens) have had to take my birth certificate to register at a local high street agency.
plorkyeran 9y ago
I'm not sure what's supposed to be notable about that? The only company I've ever interviewed with that didn't ask what my legal residence status was very early on in the process was a startup with a poor understanding of employment law. You can't assume that people who can't actually legally work for you won't apply for jobs anyway and asking it later would just waste your time.
jameshart 9y ago
The question employers are supposed to ask is whether you are legally authorized to work; 'residence status' is not relevant (and indeed you could get into trouble for refusing to hire someone who is authorized to work on the basis of their visa/residence status).
- nocman 9y ago
  Well, I guess it depends on the actual wording that was used, and I'm by no expert on the subject (by any stretch of the imagination). However, some visa's require sponsorship, and as far as I know it is perfectly legal to not hire someone if they are in the process of getting (or are planning to get) a visa that requires a sponsor -- in other words, they are expecting your company to sponsor them. There are financial and legal reasons why a company might not hire you if you were in this situation. There is more hassle for the company, and additional expense. They may or may not think any particular candidate is worth the additional hassle and expense. So it is a perfectly legitimate question to ask ( again, assuming it is asked in an appropritate manner ).
  - jameshart 9y ago
    Right - if you need a sponsored visa to work then, until you have that sponsorship, you are not authorized to work in the US. So if you ask someone this question, and they answer ‘no’, then if you really want to hire them anyway you can look into sponsoring them for a visa. But if they answer ‘yes’ (and provide the necessary documentation to prove it), you aren’t then supposed to care how they acquired that authorization. This is complicated a little for transferable sponsored visas like the H1B. Someone already on an H1B might reply ‘yes’ to the work authorization question, but with the caveat that you would need to take on their sponsorship. Technically, their answer should be ‘no’. They aren’t authorized to work for anyone other than their sponsoring employer, in a specific location, with a specific job title. As I say, the point is that if the answer is ‘yes’, not ‘yes but’, or ‘no’, then you’re not permitted to discriminate. Asking someone with work authorization questions about their visa type should be as much of an interview no-no as asking a candidate if she’s pregnant. Only exception is certain jobs can place citizenship requirements because of security clearance requirements.

echevil 9y ago

Precisely! Anyone familiar with this issue would know this is actually helping major high tech companies. But to most Americans who don't really know what is the deal with immigration, why let a chance to attack Trump administration go? :)

draw_down 9y ago
Ugh. Right, everyone is just soooo unfair to them. Give me a break.
wheretolive 9y ago
This isn't going to help high tech companies. EB1-C is a Green Card category for multinational managers. It is supposed to be used to move job creating foreign nationals to US. Till 2010, the body shop and consulting companies didn't use it much. However as rule tightened since 2010, these companies started using EB1-C to most low cost labor to US and delaying Green Card for everyone else. With EB1-C you can get Green Card within an year, cutting in line in front of everyone else from India. With this ruling, these companies are going to double down on EB1-C.
- echevil 9y ago
  Just one more thing to fix then. Even if these companies wants to double down on EB-1C, it’d still be much harder to bring in low skill tech workers as “multi-national managers”
  - DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
    I understand companies like Tata have job-titles like “Account executive” for (relatively) low-level employees which meets the “Executive-level employment” critter and rule for EB-1 classification - even though the term “executive” is clearly overloaded and inappropriate in this context.
    - jameshart 9y ago
      USCIS aren't fooled by job title inflation. Applications for these sorts of visas require substantial supporting documentation - typically org charts, detailed descriptions of responsibilities, resumes of people who report to the visa applicant, evidence of compensation commensurate with the claimed responsibilities, etc.

dang 9y ago

Ok, we've changed the URL and title to that from https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/23/588469561/trump-administration-restricts-h-1b-worker-visas-coveted-by-high-tech https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/23/588469561.... Thanks!

yanslookup 9y ago
The current title, implying abuse by Infosys, Tata et all is hyperbolic borderline xenophobic. If the way Infosys and Tata use the H-1B visa is abuse then so is how Microsoft, Google and Facebook use it.
- digitalzombie 9y ago
  "Trump Administration Restricts H-1B Worker Visas Coveted By High Tech" is the title. > If the way Infosys and Tata use the H-1B visa is abuse then so is how Microsoft, Google and Facebook use it. Infosys and Tata enable companies to abuse H-1B laws. Disney use them. Your statement also imply that Microsoft, Google, and Facebook is abusing too and no difference between Infosys and Tata. There is a small difference that I've stated but all of them are abusing it. The point of contention is not that the Indians are stealing our job. The point is the people who are using H-1B visa are unable to negotiate wages which depresses their American counterpart wages.
  - product50 9y ago
    Don't generalize that Indians are stealing your jobs. Google has 1000+ eng roles open at this time - if Americans are qualified, then they can totally get all of them. The fact of the matter is that America does have talent shortage for high end tech roles. Also, this misconception that Indians are paid less for high end roles is purely that - if you are able to crack Google eng role, you will get paid $200k+ or more depending on your level. Note that I am making a distinction between Google eng roles and those tech roles which Infosys and TCS hire for. For the latter the play is cost arbitrage such as replacing Disney engineers with Indian eng who can do the same work for lower cost. However, I want you to be aware of the real talent shortage which is present there on the high end tech side.

lawnchair_larry 9y ago

Microsoft, Apple, and Google, among other big tech companies, are some of Tata and Infosys’ largest clients, so it’s not as clear cut as it might seem. They get to avoid hiring more “expensive” FTEs by using these body shops.

andy_ppp 9y ago

Is this about stopping more non-white people from coming to the US?

nonamechicken 9y ago

I think it targets the small consultancies that operate in US. This is where I have seen all the scams happening. These consultancies don't bring people from India, they hire Indians who did MS in US (I am Indian, so only know about them), mostly those on OPT. Those people are desperate for a job (if they don't get H1B within I think 18 months, they have to go back) and are willing to do anything. Most of them come to study in US after taking big bank loans and it would be a lose for them to go back if they can't work for at least 2-3 years in US. >That's when firms bring on H-1B visa holders but don't give them work and don't pay them the required wages while they wait for jobs. I can 100% guarantee that the top Indian companies do not engage in this practice. Every single one of them have a policy that if the H1B employee doesn't have a project for 2 weeks to 1 month, they must go back to India. And they get paid the full amount mentioned in their offer letter for the duration they are in US. And they are also paid for expenses that arise from having to go back to India. This includes lease breakage, air fare for the H1B holder and their family and a few other expenses. For "benching", the only exception I have seen is the Indians they hire from US. Those people get to stay on bench until the company can find a new project for them. But they are still paid in full. >if an employer can't prove the H-1B holder is "more likely than not" needed for the full three years, the government might issue the visa for fewer than three years. This has already been the case. I have seen many H1Bs getting visa approved only for 1 year.

coupdetaco 9y ago

Large software companies pay premiums. Tata, Infosys, Cognizant, et cetera are the bad actors. https://www.economist.com/news/business/21714994-it-firms-need-upgrade-face-technological-and-political-shifts-indian-outsourcing https://www.economist.com/news/business/21714994-it-firms-ne...