5 ms·

Or imagine if an employee works for you and this happens to them.

nostrademons 1mo ago
I've had a couple of reports that this applied to. It's incredibly disruptive. "I've got to fly back to India to renew my visa." "Okay, when will you be back?" "I have no idea, it depends when I can get an appointment. It could be next week, it might be in a month." "[State department] We're pausing all visa appointments." "Well fuck." Meanwhile I've got a tech lead who is 12 hours away from the rest of the team. He was at least willing to work US-East hours while in India (basically staying up all night and sleeping during the day), but there was a huge amount of management overhead and inconvenience for the employee involved.
- assemblyman 1mo ago
  At least the procedure used to be that one would try to get an appointment at the US consulate in one's home country and then arrange the trip around it. Also, at least in my experience (but importantly, not with this administration) was that one was never required to leave the US. The main constraint is re-entry into the US and being able to travel outside the US. If one stayed here, there was no problem switching schools, programs, jobs, adjusting status to permanent residency or naturalization. On the other hand, for re-entry, one needs a valid visa stamped on a passport which necessitated a trip to one's home country. This stamping visit could be unpredictable. Ideally, one would like to travel freely to see family and friends but I see a lot of comments implying that one is forced to leave. It might be true now but a lot of comments here are conflating several issues together.
  - nostrademons 1mo ago
    The first time it happened (2023) it was a non-issue; he did exactly as you said, appointment happened as planned, and then he was back on his scheduled plane trip a week later. Everything post-2025 has been a shit-show. There's no predictability or clear guidance, either from our lawyers or from the state department. Predictability matters a lot in business. If you know what the procedure is and how long it will take, you can plan around it. If the rules change in the middle of the game you're left scrambling to keep up.
    - macintux 1mo ago
      Predictability flew out the window with the last election. I simply do not understand how any business leaders supported this, but I suppose the ability to bribe their way out of chaos was appealing.
      - nostrademons 1mo ago
        It's beneficial for the largest firms, the ones that can forge personal relationships with the administration, because it's detrimental to all other businesses. Competitive advantage and all that.
      - rayiner 1mo ago
        [flagged]
- arecurrence 1mo ago
  I've worked at companies where we transfer people to Canada during periods like this in the same time zone. Sometimes they enjoy it so much they don't want to transfer back to the US.
- artisinal 1mo ago
  [flagged]
  - doc_ick 1mo ago
    You are a great person. Thankfully you work at a non-profit and donate all of your money to charity, otherwise if you work for personal profit or company profit you may be a hypocrite.
  - mikestew 1mo ago
    The ad hominem is uncalled for, you don’t know OP’s circumstances, and there’s a lot of presumption in your comment.
- georgeburdell 1mo ago
  Props to your coworker. In my office, they usually just work normal India hours and we have a 12+ hour delay for all communications.
- DaSHacka 1mo ago
  Honestly, this is kind of the point. Making foreign labor so unbearably difficult to work with will force companies to hire domestically. At least, hire more domestic workers than they would have otherwise.
black6 1mo ago
[flagged]
- garbawarb 1mo ago
  Of not violating the law? Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a company can't use a candidate's citizenship in hiring decisions.
  - SauciestGNU 1mo ago
    Companies can though use proxies like whether a candidate would require visa sponsorship now or in the future.
    - selcuka 1mo ago
      > Companies can though use proxies So it's a decision between violating the law and acting unethically?
      - markdown 1mo ago
        Yes they all do this. "Anyone can apply. This company does not provide visa sponsorship."
      - bluegatty 1mo ago
        It's totally not illegal to discriminate against people who don't have work status and the mere suggestion is absurd. It's totally unreasonable to suggest that companies should have to hire random people from nation xyz only to have to sponsor their impossible work visas. And I say this as someone who was on work status for a very long time. Clarity, consistency, simplicity, predictability - this is what people want. Because 'discriminating against people of other ethnicities' is kind of as old as time, the issue triggers our empathy radar a bit, which is reasonable, but in reality what would be 'the most fair to everyone' is just clear rules, and very light but important anti-discrimination aka can't discriminate on age, race, gender religion aka the basics.
jimbo808 1mo ago
Hire Americans? Hundreds of thousands of tech workers have been laid off in the last two years. There are many skilled Americans on the job market. Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States, not as charity to the rest of the world, or as a source of cheaper labor for global employers seeking to undercut American wages.
- selcuka 1mo ago
  > Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States But that's the point, isn't it? Some foreign workers who "worked the US for the benefit of the US" are now unable to come back to the US. Isn't that bad for the US too?
  - 486sx33 1mo ago
    Not until all Americans who can work have jobs
    - ElProlactin 1mo ago
      And what do you do about the people who only want to work in jobs that they're not qualified for, and who have unrealistic expectations about pay, benefits, work demands, etc.? Is every natural-born American entitled to a job that pays what they want, for the hours they want, in the location they want, regardless of their qualifications for the job?
      - sandmn 1mo ago
        But isn't that how market supposed to work? Company offers to pay x for the job, can't find anyone for x, so it raises salary to x+y. I would understand logic of bringing people from other countries when there is a shortage of workers but with current market it doesn't seem to be the case.
        ElProlactin 1mo ago
        > Company offers to pay x for the job, can't find anyone for x, so it raises salary to x+y. In the world you're imagining, is x+y potentially infinite?
jpadkins 1mo ago
Correct! Hopefully more people factor this into their decision to hire immigrants. Increasing the costs of hiring immigrants is good policy (and reflects the will of the electorate).

I've had a couple of reports that this applied to. It's incredibly disruptive. "I've got to fly back to India to renew my visa." "Okay, when will you be back?" "I have no idea, it depends when I can get an appointment. It could be next week, it might be in a month." "[State department] We're pausing all visa appointments." "Well fuck." Meanwhile I've got a tech lead who is 12 hours away from the rest of the team. He was at least willing to work US-East hours while in India (basically staying up all night and sleeping during the day), but there was a huge amount of management overhead and inconvenience for the employee involved.

assemblyman 1mo ago
At least the procedure used to be that one would try to get an appointment at the US consulate in one's home country and then arrange the trip around it. Also, at least in my experience (but importantly, not with this administration) was that one was never required to leave the US. The main constraint is re-entry into the US and being able to travel outside the US. If one stayed here, there was no problem switching schools, programs, jobs, adjusting status to permanent residency or naturalization. On the other hand, for re-entry, one needs a valid visa stamped on a passport which necessitated a trip to one's home country. This stamping visit could be unpredictable. Ideally, one would like to travel freely to see family and friends but I see a lot of comments implying that one is forced to leave. It might be true now but a lot of comments here are conflating several issues together.
- nostrademons 1mo ago
  The first time it happened (2023) it was a non-issue; he did exactly as you said, appointment happened as planned, and then he was back on his scheduled plane trip a week later. Everything post-2025 has been a shit-show. There's no predictability or clear guidance, either from our lawyers or from the state department. Predictability matters a lot in business. If you know what the procedure is and how long it will take, you can plan around it. If the rules change in the middle of the game you're left scrambling to keep up.
  - macintux 1mo ago
    Predictability flew out the window with the last election. I simply do not understand how any business leaders supported this, but I suppose the ability to bribe their way out of chaos was appealing.
    - nostrademons 1mo ago
      It's beneficial for the largest firms, the ones that can forge personal relationships with the administration, because it's detrimental to all other businesses. Competitive advantage and all that.
    - rayiner 1mo ago
      [flagged]
arecurrence 1mo ago
I've worked at companies where we transfer people to Canada during periods like this in the same time zone. Sometimes they enjoy it so much they don't want to transfer back to the US.
artisinal 1mo ago
[flagged]
- doc_ick 1mo ago
  You are a great person. Thankfully you work at a non-profit and donate all of your money to charity, otherwise if you work for personal profit or company profit you may be a hypocrite.
- mikestew 1mo ago
  The ad hominem is uncalled for, you don’t know OP’s circumstances, and there’s a lot of presumption in your comment.
georgeburdell 1mo ago
Props to your coworker. In my office, they usually just work normal India hours and we have a 12+ hour delay for all communications.
DaSHacka 1mo ago
Honestly, this is kind of the point. Making foreign labor so unbearably difficult to work with will force companies to hire domestically. At least, hire more domestic workers than they would have otherwise.

black6 1mo ago

[flagged]

garbawarb 1mo ago
Of not violating the law? Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a company can't use a candidate's citizenship in hiring decisions.
- SauciestGNU 1mo ago
  Companies can though use proxies like whether a candidate would require visa sponsorship now or in the future.
  - selcuka 1mo ago
    > Companies can though use proxies So it's a decision between violating the law and acting unethically?
    - markdown 1mo ago
      Yes they all do this. "Anyone can apply. This company does not provide visa sponsorship."
    - bluegatty 1mo ago
      It's totally not illegal to discriminate against people who don't have work status and the mere suggestion is absurd. It's totally unreasonable to suggest that companies should have to hire random people from nation xyz only to have to sponsor their impossible work visas. And I say this as someone who was on work status for a very long time. Clarity, consistency, simplicity, predictability - this is what people want. Because 'discriminating against people of other ethnicities' is kind of as old as time, the issue triggers our empathy radar a bit, which is reasonable, but in reality what would be 'the most fair to everyone' is just clear rules, and very light but important anti-discrimination aka can't discriminate on age, race, gender religion aka the basics.

jimbo808 1mo ago

Hire Americans? Hundreds of thousands of tech workers have been laid off in the last two years. There are many skilled Americans on the job market. Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States, not as charity to the rest of the world, or as a source of cheaper labor for global employers seeking to undercut American wages.

selcuka 1mo ago
> Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States But that's the point, isn't it? Some foreign workers who "worked the US for the benefit of the US" are now unable to come back to the US. Isn't that bad for the US too?
- 486sx33 1mo ago
  Not until all Americans who can work have jobs
  - ElProlactin 1mo ago
    And what do you do about the people who only want to work in jobs that they're not qualified for, and who have unrealistic expectations about pay, benefits, work demands, etc.? Is every natural-born American entitled to a job that pays what they want, for the hours they want, in the location they want, regardless of their qualifications for the job?
    - sandmn 1mo ago
      But isn't that how market supposed to work? Company offers to pay x for the job, can't find anyone for x, so it raises salary to x+y. I would understand logic of bringing people from other countries when there is a shortage of workers but with current market it doesn't seem to be the case.
      - ElProlactin 1mo ago
        > Company offers to pay x for the job, can't find anyone for x, so it raises salary to x+y. In the world you're imagining, is x+y potentially infinite?

jpadkins 1mo ago

Correct! Hopefully more people factor this into their decision to hire immigrants. Increasing the costs of hiring immigrants is good policy (and reflects the will of the electorate).