3 ms·

I don’t understand why people on this forum, who are 90+% in favor of remote work and don’t believe physical presence in an office matters at all, believe they

I don’t understand why people on this forum, who are 90+% in favor of remote work and don’t believe physical presence in an office matters at all, believe they companies will choose to replace H1-B employees with different people when they can simply hire those exact same H1-B employees at a quarter of the cost when they are forced to return to their home countries? The H1-B logically displaces offshoring, not citizens. Otherwise it’s a massive coincidence that the H1-B visa happens to be used overwhelmingly by the industry that has seen the highest increase in salaries by far for Americans over the past 2 decades.

happytoexplain 2y ago
This is the (very common) fallacy that disagreeing with something, or considering it immoral, is equivalent to not believing that it will happen (if not prevented somehow).
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
seangrogg 2y ago
So you do bring up a very common line of thinking (and, I think, a common one that isn't expressed often in such topics). Firstly, you seem to be conflating H1-B with obtaining a foreign contractor. That's an accounting burden, often comes with time zone issues, and does damage to a company's return-to-office agenda unless they are hired for something completely divorced from other teams. This puts the contractor in a considerable position as they can maneuver with effectively zero oversight. Great for the contractor, bad for the employer (at least the first time; after a rapport is established it could be fine). If that's not what you meant, then the engineer(s) being hired are from a staffing agency or similar. But now you are at the behest of who the staffing agency pulls for local talent and their ability to retain said talent. Often, while incoming engineers can be vetted the employer doesn't have the latitude of choosing any engineer from the region and plucking them like they would s contractor or H1-B. An H1-B gives the employer the best of all worlds at the cost of sponsorship. The employee works for them and has considerably less options as many companies do not sponsor H1-B visas, so they have less opportunities. Between the value of the US dollar and engineers being salaried much lower elsewhere you could likely pull an H1-B for half the price of a US engineer and in many cases they would still come out very well ahead. As well, by bringing them to the US you fix any time zone issues and RTO questions. FWIW, I think a lot of US engineers tend to have a negative view on both being in-office AND having compensation reduced; I think most would be fine with a reduction in comp if it meant remote work - but most companies seem much more interested in maximum control AND minimal investment.
- c0redump 2y ago
  I more or less agree with you, but there’s a third path that you left out: expanding their footprint in other countries. For example, pretty much all major tech cos have offices in Hyderabad, India.
  - seangrogg 2y ago
    Oh, definitely, and that does resolve a large class of the problems that people have with H1-B visas! However, it's often a non-trivial choice to go that route so it excludes the majority of companies that still want access to talent. As well, even if a company does have such a footprint there are still compelling reasons they could make for wanting to bring that talent stateside long-term (i.e. a particular team is only located in the US).
johnnyanmac 2y ago
Time zones are still a thing to workaround. It's easier to import them or to nearshoe. Tech in south America is there but not super plentiful. But you're missing the real reason. It's not about salaries by itself. It's control. People like musk would even pay H1b's more than an American when they lack the leverage to easily hop to another job or can threaten to end their visa if they get uppity. Even under American soil, he can coerce them to work to the bone easier than a citizen.

happytoexplain 2y ago

This is the (very common) fallacy that disagreeing with something, or considering it immoral, is equivalent to not believing that it will happen (if not prevented somehow).

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

seangrogg 2y ago

So you do bring up a very common line of thinking (and, I think, a common one that isn't expressed often in such topics). Firstly, you seem to be conflating H1-B with obtaining a foreign contractor. That's an accounting burden, often comes with time zone issues, and does damage to a company's return-to-office agenda unless they are hired for something completely divorced from other teams. This puts the contractor in a considerable position as they can maneuver with effectively zero oversight. Great for the contractor, bad for the employer (at least the first time; after a rapport is established it could be fine). If that's not what you meant, then the engineer(s) being hired are from a staffing agency or similar. But now you are at the behest of who the staffing agency pulls for local talent and their ability to retain said talent. Often, while incoming engineers can be vetted the employer doesn't have the latitude of choosing any engineer from the region and plucking them like they would s contractor or H1-B. An H1-B gives the employer the best of all worlds at the cost of sponsorship. The employee works for them and has considerably less options as many companies do not sponsor H1-B visas, so they have less opportunities. Between the value of the US dollar and engineers being salaried much lower elsewhere you could likely pull an H1-B for half the price of a US engineer and in many cases they would still come out very well ahead. As well, by bringing them to the US you fix any time zone issues and RTO questions. FWIW, I think a lot of US engineers tend to have a negative view on both being in-office AND having compensation reduced; I think most would be fine with a reduction in comp if it meant remote work - but most companies seem much more interested in maximum control AND minimal investment.

c0redump 2y ago
I more or less agree with you, but there’s a third path that you left out: expanding their footprint in other countries. For example, pretty much all major tech cos have offices in Hyderabad, India.
- seangrogg 2y ago
  Oh, definitely, and that does resolve a large class of the problems that people have with H1-B visas! However, it's often a non-trivial choice to go that route so it excludes the majority of companies that still want access to talent. As well, even if a company does have such a footprint there are still compelling reasons they could make for wanting to bring that talent stateside long-term (i.e. a particular team is only located in the US).

johnnyanmac 2y ago

Time zones are still a thing to workaround. It's easier to import them or to nearshoe. Tech in south America is there but not super plentiful. But you're missing the real reason. It's not about salaries by itself. It's control. People like musk would even pay H1b's more than an American when they lack the leverage to easily hop to another job or can threaten to end their visa if they get uppity. Even under American soil, he can coerce them to work to the bone easier than a citizen.