6 ms·

A problem solved if visas are not associated to employers, because then an employer couldn’t hold onto the employee like this.

by rtpg 2y ago

TechDebtDevin 2y ago
No. Because it still floods the job market with off short talent that is willing to work for 30% less. Construction workers arent tied to a single employer (usually) and that drops the price of labour across the board even in union dominated markets.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
  The simple solution is for the government to put a tax on the visa. For each H1-B the company does, they pay the government an additional $200,000 per year (or some other large, arbitrary sum). If they really need them that badly, they'll pay up. What I think happens is that they discover they don't need them quite so much.
  - mgkimsal 2y ago
    Tariffs on visas?
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Great idea
    - aprilthird2021 2y ago
      It's one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard on this site frankly. For how "meritocratic" HN claims to be, they are totally fine with basically eliminating all competition in their own job sphere. Imagine how quickly business trust in the government would go down if the government mandated a $200k head tax on H1Bs. It's absurd and only here would anyone hear it and think it makes sense
      - throwaway2037 2y ago
        Why is this post so heavily downvoted? Oh wait, I guess this really hit a nerve: > For how "meritocratic" HN claims to be, they are totally fine with basically eliminating all competition in their own job sphere.
        throwawayq3423 2y ago
        There is always someone willing to do your job for less. Protection against that isn't anti-meritocratic, it's anti-exploitation.
        aprilthird2021 2y ago
        H1Bs at a lot of companies (excluding the actual criminals TCS, Wipro, etc.) are not always willing to do your job for less. Many of them make more than most US devs.
        NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
        Many make what you would consider laughable wages. I worked for a university in their IS department years ago, and since the university had an office that dealt with visas, they'd bring in people for what was truly a mediocre job. Salary probably $45-50k back in the mid-2010s. But since HN is San Francisco-centric, it can pretend otherwise I guess. Some very tiny fraction earn above what US developers earn.
        throwaway48476 2y ago
        Most people are self interested.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        Having to compete with people in the third world who have no expectations isn’t meritocracy. My dad grew up in a literal village and I remember sleeping under mosquito nets. Americans shouldn’t have to put up with the things I’m willing to put up with.
  - aylmao 2y ago
    I mean, I can think of a lot of things businesses could greatly benefit and grow from, but would have to do without if it came with $200,000/yr price tag. IMO this is not about wether a business can do without X. Most businesses can do without a lot of things, just more poorly. IMO this is about finding the right balance between the benefits and drawbacks of hiring foreign specialized workers.
  - mixmastamyk 2y ago
    Ranked by salary is an alternative I've heard.
- aylmao 2y ago
  A lot of things "flood the job market". In 2021, >104k degrees CIS degrees were awarded by US colleges [1]. There's a flood of young people entering the market every year, and they're willing to work for >30% less than experienced engineers because it's their first proper job. IMO as with all things money, it's all about negotiation. Of course a lot of negotiating power simply has to do with the market supply/demand, but a whole lot has to do with policy and rules. Giving more negotiating power to H1Bs would definitely put upwards pressure on salaries. Re: construction workers. Same problem, worker's rights. A lot of construction workers are undocumented: an estimated 20 percent [2][3]. Undocumented immigrants have virtually no negotiating power. Allowing this solid 1/5th of the workforce to confront their employer without fear of deportation would go a long way increasing compensation for the industry as a whole. [1]: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_322.10.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_322.10.a... [3]: https://limos.engin.umich.edu/deitabase/2024/05/28/undocumented-construction-workers-us/ https://limos.engin.umich.edu/deitabase/2024/05/28/undocumen...
  - greentxt 2y ago
    "Allowing this solid 1/5th of the workforce to confront their employer without fear of deportation would go a long way increasing compensation for the industry as a whole." It is strange to read this all typed out in earnest like that. Housing costs triple over night for the win? We'll all be homeless but those of us in construction will get a boost (or decreased competition from low cost imported labor).
    - aylmao 2y ago
      > Housing costs triple over night for the win? We'll all be homeless but those of us in construction will get a boost (or decreased competition from low cost imported labor). Your discourse is sensationalist and unnecessarily agitated. Paying workers a fair wage wouldn't triple housing costs, that figure is completely made up. > We'll all be homeless It also wouldn't lead to complete homelessness.
      - greentxt 2y ago
- rtpg 2y ago
  Yeah it's fair to say that if suddenly a huge influx of people show up causing downwards pressure on wages then that can happen. Though I feel like construction work is a place where there is legitimately more limits to how many people who are willing to work in that industry (even if you paid me double a SWE salary, I'm not working in scaffolding all day) locally. I do think that if you don't tie the visa to the employer, then it's _less interesting_ for an employer to recruit people from abroad. Especially for companies whose entire business model is "get cheaper IT labor, locked into mandatory service, in exchange for being an entryway to the country". Like if you despise those shops, then you really should be lobbying to get rid of the employer lock-in.
- throwaway2037 2y ago
  First, GP wrote: > A problem solved if visas are not associated to employers, because then an employer couldn’t hold onto the employee like this. Then you wrote: > No. Because it still floods the job market with off short talent that is willing to work for 30% less. In many highly developed countries in the world, visas are not associated with an employer. We don't see people clamouring to post about it on HN. Why? Because the number of visas offered to skilled migrants is relatively limited. Second, you wrote: > Construction workers arent tied to a single employer (usually) and that drops the price of labour across the board even in union dominated markets. How can you be sure that this is true? Do you have a "natural" experiment where two similar areas in the US have construction workers where area A has workers tied to a single employers and area B not? Else, how can you say this with such confidence?
  - TechDebtDevin 2y ago
    Source: I managed projects bigger than you can imagine as a very young person. I traveled between the United States, China, the Middle East and the Caribbean.You have to take my word for it, as I can't and wont dox myself. I might as well have a PhD on this subject. I don't care if you believe me or not, but what I say is true.

A problem solved if visas are not associated to employers, because then an employer couldn’t hold onto the employee like this.

by rtpg 2y ago

A problem solved if visas are not associated to employers, because then an employer couldn’t hold onto the employee like this.

TechDebtDevin 2y ago

No. Because it still floods the job market with off short talent that is willing to work for 30% less. Construction workers arent tied to a single employer (usually) and that drops the price of labour across the board even in union dominated markets.

NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
The simple solution is for the government to put a tax on the visa. For each H1-B the company does, they pay the government an additional $200,000 per year (or some other large, arbitrary sum). If they really need them that badly, they'll pay up. What I think happens is that they discover they don't need them quite so much.
- mgkimsal 2y ago
  Tariffs on visas?
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Great idea
  - aprilthird2021 2y ago
    It's one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard on this site frankly. For how "meritocratic" HN claims to be, they are totally fine with basically eliminating all competition in their own job sphere. Imagine how quickly business trust in the government would go down if the government mandated a $200k head tax on H1Bs. It's absurd and only here would anyone hear it and think it makes sense
    - throwaway2037 2y ago
      Why is this post so heavily downvoted? Oh wait, I guess this really hit a nerve: > For how "meritocratic" HN claims to be, they are totally fine with basically eliminating all competition in their own job sphere.
      - throwawayq3423 2y ago
        There is always someone willing to do your job for less. Protection against that isn't anti-meritocratic, it's anti-exploitation.
        aprilthird2021 2y ago
        H1Bs at a lot of companies (excluding the actual criminals TCS, Wipro, etc.) are not always willing to do your job for less. Many of them make more than most US devs.
        NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
        Many make what you would consider laughable wages. I worked for a university in their IS department years ago, and since the university had an office that dealt with visas, they'd bring in people for what was truly a mediocre job. Salary probably $45-50k back in the mid-2010s. But since HN is San Francisco-centric, it can pretend otherwise I guess. Some very tiny fraction earn above what US developers earn.
      - throwaway48476 2y ago
        Most people are self interested.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      Having to compete with people in the third world who have no expectations isn’t meritocracy. My dad grew up in a literal village and I remember sleeping under mosquito nets. Americans shouldn’t have to put up with the things I’m willing to put up with.
- aylmao 2y ago
  I mean, I can think of a lot of things businesses could greatly benefit and grow from, but would have to do without if it came with $200,000/yr price tag. IMO this is not about wether a business can do without X. Most businesses can do without a lot of things, just more poorly. IMO this is about finding the right balance between the benefits and drawbacks of hiring foreign specialized workers.
- mixmastamyk 2y ago
  Ranked by salary is an alternative I've heard.
aylmao 2y ago
A lot of things "flood the job market". In 2021, >104k degrees CIS degrees were awarded by US colleges [1]. There's a flood of young people entering the market every year, and they're willing to work for >30% less than experienced engineers because it's their first proper job. IMO as with all things money, it's all about negotiation. Of course a lot of negotiating power simply has to do with the market supply/demand, but a whole lot has to do with policy and rules. Giving more negotiating power to H1Bs would definitely put upwards pressure on salaries. Re: construction workers. Same problem, worker's rights. A lot of construction workers are undocumented: an estimated 20 percent [2][3]. Undocumented immigrants have virtually no negotiating power. Allowing this solid 1/5th of the workforce to confront their employer without fear of deportation would go a long way increasing compensation for the industry as a whole. [1]: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_322.10.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_322.10.a... [3]: https://limos.engin.umich.edu/deitabase/2024/05/28/undocumented-construction-workers-us/ https://limos.engin.umich.edu/deitabase/2024/05/28/undocumen...
- greentxt 2y ago
  "Allowing this solid 1/5th of the workforce to confront their employer without fear of deportation would go a long way increasing compensation for the industry as a whole." It is strange to read this all typed out in earnest like that. Housing costs triple over night for the win? We'll all be homeless but those of us in construction will get a boost (or decreased competition from low cost imported labor).
  - aylmao 2y ago
    > Housing costs triple over night for the win? We'll all be homeless but those of us in construction will get a boost (or decreased competition from low cost imported labor). Your discourse is sensationalist and unnecessarily agitated. Paying workers a fair wage wouldn't triple housing costs, that figure is completely made up. > We'll all be homeless It also wouldn't lead to complete homelessness.
    - greentxt 2y ago
rtpg 2y ago
Yeah it's fair to say that if suddenly a huge influx of people show up causing downwards pressure on wages then that can happen. Though I feel like construction work is a place where there is legitimately more limits to how many people who are willing to work in that industry (even if you paid me double a SWE salary, I'm not working in scaffolding all day) locally. I do think that if you don't tie the visa to the employer, then it's _less interesting_ for an employer to recruit people from abroad. Especially for companies whose entire business model is "get cheaper IT labor, locked into mandatory service, in exchange for being an entryway to the country". Like if you despise those shops, then you really should be lobbying to get rid of the employer lock-in.
throwaway2037 2y ago
First, GP wrote: > A problem solved if visas are not associated to employers, because then an employer couldn’t hold onto the employee like this. Then you wrote: > No. Because it still floods the job market with off short talent that is willing to work for 30% less. In many highly developed countries in the world, visas are not associated with an employer. We don't see people clamouring to post about it on HN. Why? Because the number of visas offered to skilled migrants is relatively limited. Second, you wrote: > Construction workers arent tied to a single employer (usually) and that drops the price of labour across the board even in union dominated markets. How can you be sure that this is true? Do you have a "natural" experiment where two similar areas in the US have construction workers where area A has workers tied to a single employers and area B not? Else, how can you say this with such confidence?
- TechDebtDevin 2y ago
  Source: I managed projects bigger than you can imagine as a very young person. I traveled between the United States, China, the Middle East and the Caribbean.You have to take my word for it, as I can't and wont dox myself. I might as well have a PhD on this subject. I don't care if you believe me or not, but what I say is true.