5 ms·

> For starters, H1Bs are cheaper to hire Citation needed, because this is a sweepingly broad statement. To hire an H1B you need to pay the prevailing wage, usu

> For starters, H1Bs are cheaper to hire Citation needed, because this is a sweepingly broad statement. To hire an H1B you need to pay the prevailing wage, usually at least $60k, which is more than an entry-level non-STEM college grad is going to be paid outside the Bay Area (it should still be increased to something like $90-95k IMO but that's a different issue). In addition to that, there are thousands of dollars in legal fees. And of course the application has to win the lottery (which happens in April) and then be approved for the visa (which starts in October). Which means you have to wait at least 7 months after extending an offer for the employee to start.

sdfsaf 7y ago
Yeah, in theory. In practice H1B abuse is rife. You can look at HN's previous discussion on this.
PaulHoule 7y ago
It is hard to afford to raise kids in the bay area. It is not so hard to afford to raise kids somewhere else, say Salt Lake City or Syracuse, NY. This is the "comparative advantage" that Adam Smith told you about. India can export kids to the bay area, but so can other parts of the U.S.
AimForTheBushes 7y ago
In my anecdotal experience, the business axes a position and downgrades responsibilities to a lower title. So what a Sr. DBA did before would go to a regular DBA or even a Jr. DBA. It doesn't matter what the prevailing wage for a title is when responsibilities are loosely coupled. I think the best way to counter the abuse is to increase the premium ($100k+) and allow H1Bs to move between companies.
- jogjayr 7y ago
  > So what a Sr. DBA did before would go to a regular DBA or even a Jr. DBA. GP was asserting that it is cheaper to hire H1Bs than entry-level grads, which isn't the same thing as what you're describing. > I think the best way to counter the abuse is to increase the premium ($100k+) and allow H1Bs to move between companies. I agree re: increasing the minimum to ~$90-100k. Maybe apply a CoL based multiplier so it's $85k in, for instance, Tulsa but $135-145k in the Bay Area. H1Bs are already allowed to move between companies. But the new company has to apply for a fresh visa, without going through the lottery, and it takes a few weeks, which is a hassle. Plus there's a risk of being denied or going into RFE. I think that rule could be tweaked to allow movement without approval if the offered salary in the new role is higher by a certain minimum percentage (like say 10% increase).

sdfsaf 7y ago

Yeah, in theory. In practice H1B abuse is rife. You can look at HN's previous discussion on this.

PaulHoule 7y ago

It is hard to afford to raise kids in the bay area. It is not so hard to afford to raise kids somewhere else, say Salt Lake City or Syracuse, NY. This is the "comparative advantage" that Adam Smith told you about. India can export kids to the bay area, but so can other parts of the U.S.

AimForTheBushes 7y ago

In my anecdotal experience, the business axes a position and downgrades responsibilities to a lower title. So what a Sr. DBA did before would go to a regular DBA or even a Jr. DBA. It doesn't matter what the prevailing wage for a title is when responsibilities are loosely coupled. I think the best way to counter the abuse is to increase the premium ($100k+) and allow H1Bs to move between companies.

jogjayr 7y ago
> So what a Sr. DBA did before would go to a regular DBA or even a Jr. DBA. GP was asserting that it is cheaper to hire H1Bs than entry-level grads, which isn't the same thing as what you're describing. > I think the best way to counter the abuse is to increase the premium ($100k+) and allow H1Bs to move between companies. I agree re: increasing the minimum to ~$90-100k. Maybe apply a CoL based multiplier so it's $85k in, for instance, Tulsa but $135-145k in the Bay Area. H1Bs are already allowed to move between companies. But the new company has to apply for a fresh visa, without going through the lottery, and it takes a few weeks, which is a hassle. Plus there's a risk of being denied or going into RFE. I think that rule could be tweaked to allow movement without approval if the offered salary in the new role is higher by a certain minimum percentage (like say 10% increase).