8 ms·

I have been required to create fake job postings because of US immigration policy. From the line manager perspective, how it looks is you have a colleague who

• CommanderData 2y ago
  Should be illegal but I'm sure tech companies want this loophole to remain. Anyone based in the US/UK should be an advocate for keeping jobs local for their own long term job security. Anyone who argues the opposite baffles me (sometimes for the sake of it).
  • librish 2y ago
    While it might be better for your job security to keep your own field hiring locally, it could be better for your life if all other fields hire the best regardless of nationality.
  • bpodgursky 2y ago
    [dead]
  • deepsun 2y ago
    But then I would also argue that work restrictions are illegal as well. Why would we want to restrict any high-skilled already wanted candidates from any country in the world? Why we forbid them working and paying taxes here? Bums on the streets don't pay taxes (for many reasons), but we give them permission to work. While we at the same time forbid foreign highly paid professionals to pay taxes here?
    • eweise 2y ago
      I think you know the answer but I can spell it out, if the supply of high-skilled workers goes up, then salaries go down. Most people would prefer a higher salary. Taxes remain the same, whether local or foreign people are doing the work.
      • deepsun 2y ago
        No, that's a common economy thinking flaw -- assuming there's a finite amount of work to be done. Short-term -- yes, but same as with luddites -- everyone benefits from the increased productivity of your company/city/state/country. New businesses grow, more productive companies take over business from others. So salaries raise as a whole. I would really want my city to have an influx of high-skilled workers. Even if they are higher-skilled than me -- my business would serve them and make more money.
        • selimthegrim 2y ago
          What do you think about those people in New York who didn’t want the Amazon headquarters there then? They were probably afraid of rent going up.
          • deepsun 2y ago
            Rent (and the big real estate problems) are because separate awful restrictions on building more properties. That's a local problem, created by NIMBY-ism of locals, not immigrants. We mix that with immigration, but there's no reason to. Typically workers _love_ new businesses around -- more work, more business.
  • _factor 2y ago
    If you take yourself out of the equation, hiring the best labor for local jobs, irrespective of location, is more effective use of resources and a net benefit over restricting employment to a smaller, less qualified field. It may hurt the individual, but helps the country.
    • ethanwillis 2y ago
      Is this just a modern spin on trickle down economics?
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    • hmcq6 2y ago
      >I t may hurt the individual, but helps the country. No, it helps the Capitalists. Companies already do everything they can to avoid paying taxes. They'll move the business out of the country as soon as it is financially advisable.
      • _factor 2y ago
        When they’re not able to source labor locally, is that not incentive enough to leave?
        • hmcq6 2y ago
          They are able to source labor locally though. They're just not willing to pay market rate. The fact that companies can import more exploitable workers who they can also pay less than market rate does not equate to them not being unable to find skilled local laborers. There is an abundance of qualified local laborers.
        • johnnyanmac 2y ago
          Won't. not can't. They are having their cake. They want non-American labor to lower wages, and American resources, locations, and customers to utilize. Do you see the issue here?
  • downthefoxhole 2y ago
    > Anyone based in the US/UK should be an advocate for keeping jobs local for their own long term job security. Anyone who argues the opposite baffles me It's the lesser of two evils. Given a choice 1) to let H1B's flood the market and produce lower wages, or 2) Have the company setup shop in a foreign land, and hire those people there locally, which do you think is better? At least with option 1, the money is still being made in the USA, taxes are paid here, and the money is spent here for housing, food, cars, etc.. which benefits everyone around.
    • EatDevSlay 2y ago
      Tariffs and taxes easily solve that issue.
      • edc117 2y ago
        Will they? Trump has said he's in favor of the H1-B program and has given no indications that he plans to lessen or stop it. Tariffs will likely be used as bargaining tools - you won't see tariffs directed at a country because a US corporation has outsourced labor there. There's a lot of noise about changes to immigration right now, but I'd be very unsurprised if little or nothing changed.
        • EatDevSlay 2y ago
          I have no issues with the Right learning that it must become further right to achieve its goals.
      • johnnyanmac 2y ago
        They worked so well against China in 2018 right?
        • EatDevSlay 2y ago
          Correct.
    • alfalfasprout 2y ago
  • microtherion 2y ago
    H1-Bs ARE keeping the JOBS local. They are merely filling them to some extent with immigrant EMPLOYEES (working side by side with true, red-blooded Americans). The alternative, in many cases, would not be companies hiring an all-American staff. It would be hiring in their foreign offices instead, with Americans only considered if they emigrate. Or an American skeleton crew being sidelined from where the bulk of development happens.
    • alephnerd 2y ago
      > Or an American skeleton crew being sidelined from where the bulk of development happens. Already the norm in cybersecurity. Most of the new gen (post 2015) cybersecurity vendors have almost completely moved engineering and product to Israel and India.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• creer 2y ago
  These are not fake. "On paper potentially qualified" has meant nothing for a long time. And if truly acceptable candidates do show up, that scuttles the immigration application. The ads are written so that etc, but they still correspond to an actual job that is actually, actively hiring and actually, actively paying. You do learn to recognize them, and then you only need apply if you carefully meet all the requirements because THESE job postings WERE carefully written. But they are real by definition: there is a job and it is carefully spec-ed, as opposed to the rest of the garbage. And much effort went into the process, as opposed to the rest of the garbage. And someone was writing on HN recently about their immigration process being scuttled by this.
  • johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >"On paper potentially qualified" has meant nothing for a long time. yeah, almost like we have a much too long process after the paper to determine if that paper lives up to its name. Even then, what does that say about our society if our automatic assumption is that a job application and the resume submitted are all fake? >And if truly acceptable candidates do show up, that scuttles the immigration application. yes, that's the point. We can fine tune some things (someone already in the country and working hard shouldn't need to worry about losing their visa becuse a company found an American), but the overall point of this is to prioritize hiring domestic labor. >You do learn to recognize them I'd love to have some tips, I am as dense as a log.
    • creer 2y ago
      > > And if truly acceptable candidates do show up, that scuttles the immigration application. > yes, that's the point. The discussion is about whether job postings are real or fake. I use "scuttles" as evidence that that one is very real. > >You do learn to recognize them > I'd love to have some tips, I am as dense as a log. For example, such a job posting is likely oddly specific as to experience and what it's applied to. A nonsense job posting might enumerate a bunch of irrelevant software applications or languages. We all (?) know to ignore that list. A visa requirement posting is not likely to do that. It's supposed to actually limit itself to required stuff. The software mentioned might be very specific and exactly the one that is actually used on the job. Not some HR or managerial delirium. For another example, some quirks of the current person's experience are likely to be mentioned when they are actually in use on the job (or at least plausibly in use). They may again seem oddly specific and quirky. These get mentioned because why not: they strongly restrict the number of people that might fit that position, and they are not even a lie. It used to be also that it needed to be published in a publication "of record", like, not just on a web site. Some papers were full of these strange job postings. I have no idea what is the current requirement as to publication medium.
• BeetleB 2y ago
  I want to make something explicit: The US Labor requirements for PERM merely require the employer to make the posting and evaluate the candidates. If they do find a US based candidate, the law isn't saying the company has to hire them - just that the PERM application for the current foreign employee will get rejected. He still gets to keep his job as long as his visa is valid. Yes, companies will play games to ensure he passes the labor certification. And yes, it doesn't always work. In a team I was in, we had a bunch of Indians who got rejected multiple times over the years before they finally got approval. The folks on the government side didn't just take the company's word - they "randomly" picked a person and would audit all the people who had applied and would argue (successfully) with the company that some of the US based applicants were actually eligible for the role.
  • snailmailstare 2y ago
    An explanation where companies intentionally didn't follow through would be less clearly fake job listings. The jobs are 100% fake even if they may be from companies more likely to have real listings than average and it is an extravagant astroturfing deception coordinated by a government to collect market information. If this were done by a University, an ethics board would halt it.
    • johnnyanmac 2y ago
      >it is an extravagant astroturfing deception coordinated by a government to collect market information. Does a government need to go through these hoops to get market information? I thought that past part of the point of the Bureau of labor and several other organizations.
• joe_the_user 2y ago
  >I have been required to create fake job postings because of US immigration policy. Your post is useful information and I believe you're telling things from your perspective. But I gotten say required can't be the right word. A more correct to put things is "US immigration policy strongly encentivizes broadly dishonest behavior and we go along 'cause all other companies do". If we're talking broad policy, the companies that are doing this sell immigration policies as being intended only for uniquely skilled individual but support policies that tie H1-b holders to a given company so their salaries are held down. And naturally, the point is that immigration policies broadly are aimed for both getting uniquely skilled individuals and to create an environment roughly lowering wages, some companies leaning on one part, some companies leaning on the other. And yeah, managers on the front lines indeed maybe only see the seemingly irrational results.
  • mike_d 2y ago
    > But I gotten say required can't be the right word. I read it as their boss told them they had to do it.
• uoaei 2y ago
  "Required" is not accurate. You are implying that US immigration policy mandates the creation of fake job postings. Rather, you chose to create those fake job postings in service of some arbitrary reason. However justified you think that reason is, it is still arbitrary, and that was still a choice.
  • snailmailstare 2y ago
    https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-e-chapter-6 https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-e-chapter-...
    • burnte 2y ago
      Where in there is there something stating "if you don't really want a domestic worker, then simply create the job advert but then make up reasons not to hire applicants and tell us you couldn't find anyone." It seems as though you read that person's comment as "advertising jobs is not required" when what they said was "don't pretend your company's effort to skirt regulations was actually what's legitimately required to abide by them." Regulations DO NOT state you have to go through the motions even if your intent is to hire a foreign worker anyway. The regulations state that you CAN'T hire a foreign worker if you haven't legitimately tried to hire a local worker. By going into the process with the INTENT of hiring a foreign worker regardless of your local worker search is fraud. Regs do not say "You must commit fraud."
      • snailmailstare 2y ago
        The claim is that the company did this for their own random reasons. It is a required market test with penalties if you file a petition and had a qualified worker you couldn't reject, not filing a petition because you do puts you out of their responsibility so whether you are hiring after their fraud is your own business.
        • deleted 2y ago
          [deleted]
• bandinobaddies 2y ago
  > To support this, we are required to post a fake job ad for their position I believe this would be considered immigration fraud.
  • HenryBemis 2y ago
    Since nobody ever writes "hey John/Mary create a fake job ad so that we can do the fraud to help <name>". So the company/hiring manager can later say that "Bandinobaddies didn't have the X skill, HenryBemis didn't have the Y skill but <name> had both skills so we kept him around and offered to him as he already knew the company/role/tech/etc." And good luck proving that on the call (that was never recorded I proved/or not about the Y skill).
    • leoqa 2y ago
      I imagine a couple interviews with HSI agents would get someone to cough up a statement that they did not intend to fill the role. If I were a line manager, I would not rely on the company’s lawyers to protect me from prosecution.
      • lp0_on_fire 2y ago
        The company lawyers are just as likely to throw said line manager under the bus, should it come to that.
• burnte 2y ago
  You were "forced" to create fake job postings because your company engaged in immigration visa fraud, not because of immigration policy. Immigration policy does NOT state "you must put out a job posting and make up reasons you can't hire Americans." It states that you must look for Americans, and if you can't find them, then you may look at immigration visas. What your company decided to do, as many do, is they've already decided on getting cheaper immigrant workers, and then go through the fraudulent process to get them. This is why people like me come out so vociferously against H1B caps being raised or removed. Fraud is rampant and I personally know people, US citizens, who have lost jobs to H1B people who get paid half as much.
  • johnnyanmac 2y ago
    Well, it wasn't if they'd (the company) create the posting. It was whether or not GP would say yes, or say no and get fired so someone else can do it. Can't blame the messanger too much. >they've already decided on getting cheaper immigrant workers, and then go through the fraudulent process to get them. If it's truly banking talent, it lilely still isn't cheap. It's just talent that can't easily job hop in 1-2 years to a competing bank. It's a soft form of the anti-poaching agreements certain companies had over a decade ago. Easiest way to mess that up for companies is to simply make a Visa applicable as long as that worker stays in the US sector of that industry. So the company does the work but gets no handcuffs. The idea of H1B's is to attract top talent, not hold them hostage at a single company.
    • rsanek 2y ago
      >It was whether or not GP would say yes, or say no and get fired so someone else can do it you can rationalize anything with this kind of logic
      • johnnyanmac 2y ago
        In a world where we live to work, yes. Not everyone can be a whistleblower
• Longlius 2y ago
  Why would you openly admit to committing a crime (visa fraud) on Hacker News?
  • dzdt 2y ago
    I will reply here because I think this is a good question, even if it may have been intended as merely rhetorical. (1) The process was distasteful. I want there to be broader knowledge of the disfunctional way this system works in practice. (2) I don't think anything I did was illegal under the letter of the law. I describe it a bit provocatively with words like "invent" and "fake" but if I was in a court of law I could defend as having solid reasons every candidate we rejected for the fake job search. The corporation had legal council engaged guiding the whole process in ways they advised to meet the corporation's aim of retaining the employee and helping them move from H1B to PERM status. (3) This account is pseudonymous and while I am sure it is possible to get from it back to a real name I don't expect its worth that effort to any legal authorities, based on my description of practices they are well aware of. (4) To me the most distasteful parts of this are the governmemt policy. In cases I've been involved in the employee already in the seat has been a stronger candidate for the role than anyone turned up in the fake search. This matches the corporation's goal of hiring the best candidates to begin with. The awful bit is that immigration policy doesn't allow any other path for a company to support a H1B visa holder moving to PERM status.
    • mixdup 2y ago
      in terms of (4) the thing is that the government policy isn't solely concerned with "hiring the best candidate", or at least not necessarily considering cheap labor to be one of the criteria factoring into "best" the government policy is concerned with protecting the jobs of citizens as well. it's a balance. it is meant to be a relief valve for employers when they legitimately can't find employees, it's not meant to be a mechanism for creating a wage ceiling or indenturing your employees so they can't move
      • dzdt 2y ago
        You have it backwards. The existing policy (assessed as it works in practice) lowers wages for high-skilled roles such as I mention and endentures employees so they can't easily move. For the roles I am familiar with the progression is (1) foreigner ineligable to work in US (2) OPT visa (3) H1B visa (4) Permanent resident (5) US citizen. Between each step of the progression are barriers with the effect that employees at a lower level have less negotiation power and must accept lower wages and cannot easily move to another job. The barrier between (1) and (2) is a masters or PhD in a STEM subject area from a US university. From (2) to (3) there is a visa lottery. From (3) to (4) is the PERM process involving the fake job search as I described. While under OPT or H1B visa, you MUST have a job or be deported. Timeframes to find an initial or a new job are very short. This is what gives employers increased power in the relationship, lowering wages and creating the nearly indentured status. To decrease the effect of lowered wages and indentured status requires a reduced number of people in visa states (2) and (3), which would be achieved by raising barriers between (1) and (2) or lowering barriers between (3) and (4). The distasteful PERM process is the barrier between (3) and (4). If the policy goal was to raise wages, it would be designed differently. E.g. if the top 20% by taxable income of H1B holders were offered PERM status each year, it would be a different dynamic.
• hmcq6 2y ago
  "I fucked a lot of people out of jobs and wasted their time but I don't want to name and shame because I don't want to have to look for a job myself" Edit: I appreciate your honesty. I just want to call out the irony. I don't think you're a bad person, I wish you would whistleblow but I understand why you cant.