5 ms·

I am someone who went through (fully legal) immigration hell while building a company that in the end, employed 100s of US workers and had global competition (m

I am someone who went through (fully legal) immigration hell while building a company that in the end, employed 100s of US workers and had global competition (meaning, if we didn't do it in the US the jobs would probably go to some other country). Here's my conclusion from this experience: if you are in a business that depends on Intellectual Property competes globally (i.e. not a nail salon hiring local workers), then in the area that gives you your competitve advantage YOU NEED TO HIRE THE BEST GLOBAL TALENT. Period. If the immigration system doesn't allow that, then either you'll hire remote, or you'll be beaten by an international competitor with more liberal skilled immigration rules. Neither is a great outcome. There are simple ways to ensure H1-B is used to hire this type of talent. The recent rules that prioritize H1-B applicants based on their salary are positive IMO and address a lot of the Tata/Infosys abuse (which is real). If you are truly going after the best global talent, that won't be cheap! H1-B is super old school. The notion is that you only hire someone in H1-B if there's nobody that can do the job. However, the challenge today is not if you can do the job, but can you do it better than the global competitors? That concept is super foreign to immigration legislation (no pun intended :). Short of a whole new immigration framework, increasing the number of H1-Bs and prioritizing based on salary would be a good short term fix - no lawsuits needed.

nrmitchi 6y ago
> prioritizing based on salary would be a good short term fix You have to remember that H1-Bs are used for many occupations and industries outside of tech. Prioritizing by salary only effectively means that 99% of all H1-Bs would go to 3-4 large companies. Yes, nurses, doctors, etc may not get paid as much as a FAANG engineer a couple of years out of college, but they are still often needed. I think that if you want to prioritize by salary within industries that could potentially work, but then you're bordering on a "new immigration framework".
- paxys 6y ago
  > Yes, nurses, doctors, etc may not get paid as much as a FAANG engineer a couple of years out of college, but they are still often needed. Doesn't that mean nurses, doctors etc. should be paid more, rather than the reverse?
  - nrmitchi 6y ago
    I'm not saying that they shouldn't get paid more, and I'm also not saying that people in tech should get paid less. But tying it to only salary doesn't create a balanced system. There are occupations that are understaffed and have a need for foreign skilled workers that simply can not practically match what a FAANG engineer gets paid.
  - thelean12 6y ago
    "should be paid more" doesn't mean anything in the US or any society based in capitalism. With capitalism it's mostly supply, demand, leverage, and a few others. Compensation isn't connected to moral obligation.
    - JamesBarney 6y ago
      And specifically FAANG engineer's price is established in a free market where as nurses and doctors are protected by licensure which drives their price above the natural market rate. Therefore their wages should probably be lower.
  - 908B64B197 6y ago
    The caps on the available residency spots might have something to do with this as well.
- sjg007 6y ago
  There are plenty of doctors on H1Bs. The Midwest is full of them and they command high salaries. At any rate, different job categories can have different requirements. I know soccer coaches that are H1Bs. These are coaches who train elite junior teams for example. Musicians, theatre all works the same way.
  - nrmitchi 6y ago
    > The Midwest is full of them and they command high salaries. Yes, they do, but that does not mean they will beat out what FAANG is able to pay an engineer if H1-Bs are granted based solely on salary. > At any rate, different job categories can have different requirements. I'm not sure what you mean by this, but if you mean different salary requirements, then that effectively goes away if you start granting H1-Bs based solely on salary. > Musicians, theatre all works the same way. This is... kind of my point? I seriously doubt that these musicians and artists are being paid comparably to a SF-based FAANG engineer. If they are, they are more-likely-than-not qualified for an O-1 anyways, so the point is kind of moot.
    - sjg007 6y ago
      Different job categories have different wage requirements. This hasn’t changed.
      - nrmitchi 6y ago
        I know that. I'm not saying they don't. OP at the top of this thread suggested that it effectively should, by just giving H1-Bs to the 80k jobs per year that would pay the most. I am disagreeing with that statement.
fooey 6y ago
The point of law is to serve the nation Is it in the nation's best interest for you to hire the best person? or to hire a tax payer? It's not old school, it's self protection.
- jtdev 6y ago
  Talent and skill development also happen in the workplace... so requiring U.S. companies to hire U.S. workers serves the nation. We see a similar issue in academia, where top programs have a huge cohort of foreign students - students who are likely to take the knowledge gained (at institutions built in part through decades of public funding) back to their home countries (understandably).
  - tisu32 6y ago
    That's not quite true in my opinon. Take your example of academia. Many students will chose to stay in the US after (if they can, because salaries tend to be higher than in many other countries) rather than depart. Also, instead of "taking" knowledge, they might actually create some new knowledge. Think about how many brilliant professors in US universities were once foreign post-docs there. If the US chooses to close its borders to this sort of talent, it will considerably weaken itself in the longer term against countries enacting more rational immigration policies.
    - jtdev 6y ago
      And many students choose to return to their origin countries... some of these countries are even exerting influence on our academic institutions, e.g., China’s “Confucius Institute” model. If you think that’s in the interest of the U.S. you’re being willfully ignorant.
      - tisu32 6y ago
        That's not what I said. Yes, some students (a small minority) will be acting in the interests of other countries. Overall, the US is a net winner in terms of benefits vs costs of foreign students. This is one of the reasons many colleges are currently under strong financial strain: no international students to pay the bills. Would you rather close borders to all foreign students?
bagacrap 6y ago
I don't understand this comment. The justice department alleges that Facebook went out of its way to hide jobs from Americans bc there is a power imbalance that favors the employer of an immigrant worker. This wasn't about hiring better talent, but about hiring talent that you can underpay while still retaining. As a side effect, qualified Americans were harmed. These allegations may or may not be true but I fail to see how your framing addresses the complaint. I agree that forcing higher pay for visa holders helps to align incentives.
- flowerlad 6y ago
  The idea that FB wants to underpay any employee is preposterous. You are aware that FB & Google pay 2x other companies such as Microsoft and Amazon? If you join tech companies such as FB, Google, Amazon or MSFT as an H-1B immigrant, if your performance is good they want to keep you, so they sponsor you for greencard. Once an employee gets a greencard he/she is free to leave the company, so if the goal is to underpay you want to NOT sponsor for greencard. As part of sponsoring an employee for greencard you have to post an advertisement for the position the employee is already doing a good job in, so most employers see this as a formality and don't recruit as vigorously as they would for a position that is actually open. This should be expected, and the problem is the stupid rule, not the companies. The rules need to be changed to advertise before the position is given to an H-1B candidate, not afterwards.
  - nrmitchi 6y ago
    > if your performance is good they want to keep you, so they sponsor you for greencard I think this is an important factor that shouldn't be ignored. An employer can not choose to keep you on an H1-B forever. That status will expire after 7 years, at which point you are either leaving, or have already begun the PERM process.

nrmitchi 6y ago

> prioritizing based on salary would be a good short term fix You have to remember that H1-Bs are used for many occupations and industries outside of tech. Prioritizing by salary only effectively means that 99% of all H1-Bs would go to 3-4 large companies. Yes, nurses, doctors, etc may not get paid as much as a FAANG engineer a couple of years out of college, but they are still often needed. I think that if you want to prioritize by salary within industries that could potentially work, but then you're bordering on a "new immigration framework".

paxys 6y ago
> Yes, nurses, doctors, etc may not get paid as much as a FAANG engineer a couple of years out of college, but they are still often needed. Doesn't that mean nurses, doctors etc. should be paid more, rather than the reverse?
- nrmitchi 6y ago
  I'm not saying that they shouldn't get paid more, and I'm also not saying that people in tech should get paid less. But tying it to only salary doesn't create a balanced system. There are occupations that are understaffed and have a need for foreign skilled workers that simply can not practically match what a FAANG engineer gets paid.
- thelean12 6y ago
  "should be paid more" doesn't mean anything in the US or any society based in capitalism. With capitalism it's mostly supply, demand, leverage, and a few others. Compensation isn't connected to moral obligation.
  - JamesBarney 6y ago
    And specifically FAANG engineer's price is established in a free market where as nurses and doctors are protected by licensure which drives their price above the natural market rate. Therefore their wages should probably be lower.
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  The caps on the available residency spots might have something to do with this as well.
sjg007 6y ago
There are plenty of doctors on H1Bs. The Midwest is full of them and they command high salaries. At any rate, different job categories can have different requirements. I know soccer coaches that are H1Bs. These are coaches who train elite junior teams for example. Musicians, theatre all works the same way.
- nrmitchi 6y ago
  > The Midwest is full of them and they command high salaries. Yes, they do, but that does not mean they will beat out what FAANG is able to pay an engineer if H1-Bs are granted based solely on salary. > At any rate, different job categories can have different requirements. I'm not sure what you mean by this, but if you mean different salary requirements, then that effectively goes away if you start granting H1-Bs based solely on salary. > Musicians, theatre all works the same way. This is... kind of my point? I seriously doubt that these musicians and artists are being paid comparably to a SF-based FAANG engineer. If they are, they are more-likely-than-not qualified for an O-1 anyways, so the point is kind of moot.
  - sjg007 6y ago
    Different job categories have different wage requirements. This hasn’t changed.
    - nrmitchi 6y ago
      I know that. I'm not saying they don't. OP at the top of this thread suggested that it effectively should, by just giving H1-Bs to the 80k jobs per year that would pay the most. I am disagreeing with that statement.

fooey 6y ago

The point of law is to serve the nation Is it in the nation's best interest for you to hire the best person? or to hire a tax payer? It's not old school, it's self protection.

jtdev 6y ago
Talent and skill development also happen in the workplace... so requiring U.S. companies to hire U.S. workers serves the nation. We see a similar issue in academia, where top programs have a huge cohort of foreign students - students who are likely to take the knowledge gained (at institutions built in part through decades of public funding) back to their home countries (understandably).
- tisu32 6y ago
  That's not quite true in my opinon. Take your example of academia. Many students will chose to stay in the US after (if they can, because salaries tend to be higher than in many other countries) rather than depart. Also, instead of "taking" knowledge, they might actually create some new knowledge. Think about how many brilliant professors in US universities were once foreign post-docs there. If the US chooses to close its borders to this sort of talent, it will considerably weaken itself in the longer term against countries enacting more rational immigration policies.
  - jtdev 6y ago
    And many students choose to return to their origin countries... some of these countries are even exerting influence on our academic institutions, e.g., China’s “Confucius Institute” model. If you think that’s in the interest of the U.S. you’re being willfully ignorant.
    - tisu32 6y ago
      That's not what I said. Yes, some students (a small minority) will be acting in the interests of other countries. Overall, the US is a net winner in terms of benefits vs costs of foreign students. This is one of the reasons many colleges are currently under strong financial strain: no international students to pay the bills. Would you rather close borders to all foreign students?

bagacrap 6y ago

I don't understand this comment. The justice department alleges that Facebook went out of its way to hide jobs from Americans bc there is a power imbalance that favors the employer of an immigrant worker. This wasn't about hiring better talent, but about hiring talent that you can underpay while still retaining. As a side effect, qualified Americans were harmed. These allegations may or may not be true but I fail to see how your framing addresses the complaint. I agree that forcing higher pay for visa holders helps to align incentives.

flowerlad 6y ago
The idea that FB wants to underpay any employee is preposterous. You are aware that FB & Google pay 2x other companies such as Microsoft and Amazon? If you join tech companies such as FB, Google, Amazon or MSFT as an H-1B immigrant, if your performance is good they want to keep you, so they sponsor you for greencard. Once an employee gets a greencard he/she is free to leave the company, so if the goal is to underpay you want to NOT sponsor for greencard. As part of sponsoring an employee for greencard you have to post an advertisement for the position the employee is already doing a good job in, so most employers see this as a formality and don't recruit as vigorously as they would for a position that is actually open. This should be expected, and the problem is the stupid rule, not the companies. The rules need to be changed to advertise before the position is given to an H-1B candidate, not afterwards.
- nrmitchi 6y ago
  > if your performance is good they want to keep you, so they sponsor you for greencard I think this is an important factor that shouldn't be ignored. An employer can not choose to keep you on an H1-B forever. That status will expire after 7 years, at which point you are either leaving, or have already begun the PERM process.