6 ms·

Why is there a lottery anyway instead of a salary ranking/salary threshold system? This'd disincentivize bad actors, ensure the US domestic labor pool is not un

Why is there a lottery anyway instead of a salary ranking/salary threshold system? This'd disincentivize bad actors, ensure the US domestic labor pool is not undercut, and (more or less) lead to higher quality H-1B immigrants.

rudolfwinestock 3y ago
You just answered your own question.
bradleyjg 3y ago
Because regions and industries that pay less would be mad, and they’ve got lots of congressmen.
- shadow28 3y ago
  That could potentially be solved by having different buckets for different regions and industries? Seems like that'd be a much fairer system than the current lottery one.
  - achow 3y ago
    Different regions can be easily gamed by opening PO Box offices in all the regions.
    - Muromec 3y ago
      Well, then you check tax return of employees -- if they don't actually reside in the same region, the last person who touched the immigration form is getting a date with a rattan stick.
  - DopplerSmell 3y ago
    Fair is an odd word here, the system should work for the greatest benefit for Americans. I think a wage threshold and weighting would be best, but others think a controlled random mixing of labour markets is better for the overall economy.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - makmanalp 3y ago
    This exists. Here are the prevailing wage cutoffs for each experience level (calculated by the BLS) they use for "software developers" in SF, for example: https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=15-1252&area=41860&year=24&source=1 https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=15-1...
- cherryteastain 3y ago
  Set the thresholds using a countrywide baseline (1.0 = countrywide median household income) and adjust according to the median household income of the city the job would be located in. Also adjust thresholds based on the profession.
  - meragrin_ 3y ago
    Those same companies then claim position is small town x, but that office magically closes when H1-B arrives. A better way might be weighing based on the applying company. Give a weight based on the size of the company and another for the type of company. These weights would be assigned based on the top-most owner(s) and not the applying companies themselves. Also add penalties for larger companies acquiring smaller companies with H1-Bs that were hired within the last X number of years. Not sure what penalties exactly. At least financial to fund the system, but probably to the weighing as well.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  Regions and industries that pay less don't need more labor, hence the unwillingness to pay for it.
4ad 3y ago
There is a salary threshold, but it is very low, $60k/yr IIRC. It was last updated during the 90s. A salary ranking scheme would cut most professions out.
ethagknight 3y ago
Kickbacks, my guy!
- ethagknight 3y ago
  Downvoted but im honestly not sure why. If you stack rank visa allocations based on pay, the same pervasive fraud culture will find ways to bid rig, including… “paying your employees high but require they rent their office space, health insurance and IT equipment from you.”
Spooky23 3y ago
Because the State of West Virginia needs COBOL programmers for $29/hr, so the prime contractor can bill $90. (Not singling them out, just using for illustration purposes)
lesuorac 3y ago
Well, not all specialties pay the same so it'd be problematic if some of the worse paying ones had a bunch of unfilled spots while higher ones didn't. There isn't a (financial) incentive to quit your better paying job to work a less paying one. I think a better solution is just a "tariff" where a company has to pay an additional 50% of the total compensation to the government. Then if you could fill the spot with an american you'd want to because it saves you a ton of money; but if you actually can't find somebody (at your offered price) then you still have the option of offering a visa.
- DopplerSmell 3y ago
  This completely ignores higher order effects, if you can't employ someone to do a task at a wage that makes profit, it creates conditions where capital investment in innovation and labour multiplication makes more sense. It never makes sense to import someone who has less earning potential than any other candidate; at least not in a long term context (it makes plenty of sense for a current business for their own short term profit).
- confidantlake 3y ago
  So pay someone $20 an hour and pay the government $10 an hour.
commandlinefan 3y ago
> instead of a salary ranking/salary threshold Because in spite of what the law actually says, the entire purpose of the H1B visa program is and always has been a way to get mostly adequate people who'll work cheap.
- aprilthird2021 3y ago
  No, this isn't true and never was. The reason is that having a lottery is a set of tradeoffs. You sort of corruption-proof the system by not allowing rich industries to monopolize foreign talent. In exchange, since you can't use salary or terminal degree to distinguish, you kinda have to make sure abuse is tamped down as much as possible. The H1B program is extremely important in a country which has 1) an aging, shrinking population and 2) generally poor educational outcomes for its citizens compared to developed nation peers. The very fact that some of the biggest companies in the world are helmed by former H1Bs tells you how helpful of a program it really has been for the US.
  - rqtwteye 3y ago
    From my observation the number of highly qualified H1Bs is a small share of the total number. Most are average or below average that are held captive by Infosys and friends.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      That is a different form of abuse from if only the rich could afford to bid. I think it is overall worse (see my other reply) - but I'll freely admit there may be some abuse I'm not aware of that makes my current alternative worse.
    - izacus 3y ago
      How did you make this observation? There's more than 500 thousand H1B holders, how did you analyze them to end up with this claim?
      - 3y ago
horns4lyfe 3y ago
Because no one involved in the policy making cares about what’s actually best for the people involved. It’s money all the way down.
briffle 3y ago
If the problem is a lack of local talent in the US, then it seems like a reverse auction would be the best way to ensure they aren't just importing cheap indentured servants. And the money brought in from that reverse auction could be used to fund education where there is the most demand.

rudolfwinestock 3y ago

You just answered your own question.

bradleyjg 3y ago

Because regions and industries that pay less would be mad, and they’ve got lots of congressmen.

shadow28 3y ago
That could potentially be solved by having different buckets for different regions and industries? Seems like that'd be a much fairer system than the current lottery one.
- achow 3y ago
  Different regions can be easily gamed by opening PO Box offices in all the regions.
  - Muromec 3y ago
    Well, then you check tax return of employees -- if they don't actually reside in the same region, the last person who touched the immigration form is getting a date with a rattan stick.
- DopplerSmell 3y ago
  Fair is an odd word here, the system should work for the greatest benefit for Americans. I think a wage threshold and weighting would be best, but others think a controlled random mixing of labour markets is better for the overall economy.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- makmanalp 3y ago
  This exists. Here are the prevailing wage cutoffs for each experience level (calculated by the BLS) they use for "software developers" in SF, for example: https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=15-1252&area=41860&year=24&source=1 https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=15-1...
cherryteastain 3y ago
Set the thresholds using a countrywide baseline (1.0 = countrywide median household income) and adjust according to the median household income of the city the job would be located in. Also adjust thresholds based on the profession.
- meragrin_ 3y ago
  Those same companies then claim position is small town x, but that office magically closes when H1-B arrives. A better way might be weighing based on the applying company. Give a weight based on the size of the company and another for the type of company. These weights would be assigned based on the top-most owner(s) and not the applying companies themselves. Also add penalties for larger companies acquiring smaller companies with H1-Bs that were hired within the last X number of years. Not sure what penalties exactly. At least financial to fund the system, but probably to the weighing as well.
willcipriano 3y ago
Regions and industries that pay less don't need more labor, hence the unwillingness to pay for it.

4ad 3y ago

There is a salary threshold, but it is very low, $60k/yr IIRC. It was last updated during the 90s. A salary ranking scheme would cut most professions out.

ethagknight 3y ago

Kickbacks, my guy!

ethagknight 3y ago
Downvoted but im honestly not sure why. If you stack rank visa allocations based on pay, the same pervasive fraud culture will find ways to bid rig, including… “paying your employees high but require they rent their office space, health insurance and IT equipment from you.”

Spooky23 3y ago

Because the State of West Virginia needs COBOL programmers for $29/hr, so the prime contractor can bill $90. (Not singling them out, just using for illustration purposes)

lesuorac 3y ago

Well, not all specialties pay the same so it'd be problematic if some of the worse paying ones had a bunch of unfilled spots while higher ones didn't. There isn't a (financial) incentive to quit your better paying job to work a less paying one. I think a better solution is just a "tariff" where a company has to pay an additional 50% of the total compensation to the government. Then if you could fill the spot with an american you'd want to because it saves you a ton of money; but if you actually can't find somebody (at your offered price) then you still have the option of offering a visa.

DopplerSmell 3y ago
This completely ignores higher order effects, if you can't employ someone to do a task at a wage that makes profit, it creates conditions where capital investment in innovation and labour multiplication makes more sense. It never makes sense to import someone who has less earning potential than any other candidate; at least not in a long term context (it makes plenty of sense for a current business for their own short term profit).
confidantlake 3y ago
So pay someone $20 an hour and pay the government $10 an hour.

commandlinefan 3y ago

> instead of a salary ranking/salary threshold Because in spite of what the law actually says, the entire purpose of the H1B visa program is and always has been a way to get mostly adequate people who'll work cheap.

aprilthird2021 3y ago
No, this isn't true and never was. The reason is that having a lottery is a set of tradeoffs. You sort of corruption-proof the system by not allowing rich industries to monopolize foreign talent. In exchange, since you can't use salary or terminal degree to distinguish, you kinda have to make sure abuse is tamped down as much as possible. The H1B program is extremely important in a country which has 1) an aging, shrinking population and 2) generally poor educational outcomes for its citizens compared to developed nation peers. The very fact that some of the biggest companies in the world are helmed by former H1Bs tells you how helpful of a program it really has been for the US.
- rqtwteye 3y ago
  From my observation the number of highly qualified H1Bs is a small share of the total number. Most are average or below average that are held captive by Infosys and friends.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    That is a different form of abuse from if only the rich could afford to bid. I think it is overall worse (see my other reply) - but I'll freely admit there may be some abuse I'm not aware of that makes my current alternative worse.
  - izacus 3y ago
    How did you make this observation? There's more than 500 thousand H1B holders, how did you analyze them to end up with this claim?
    - 3y ago

horns4lyfe 3y ago

Because no one involved in the policy making cares about what’s actually best for the people involved. It’s money all the way down.

briffle 3y ago

If the problem is a lack of local talent in the US, then it seems like a reverse auction would be the best way to ensure they aren't just importing cheap indentured servants. And the money brought in from that reverse auction could be used to fund education where there is the most demand.