[TomGuy]

The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

That should be easy to do ... (???)

Been happening for years with the H1B program. Employer just signs a paper stating no local applicants available. Then they can hire foreign for must less than they would have to pay otherwise.

In the early 80's I worked for a co that typical hired H1B's at about 1/2 what it would have to pay locals.

This is just another way to allow companies to continue to hire cheap foreign labor and use the excuse that no local American would take the job.

How many born Americans (bA) actually do work in those same jobs throughout the Nation? How many bA's actually work as housekeepers, maids, work in fast food industries, food processing, etc., etc., etc.

These "programs" are nothing but more attempts to allow companies to hire cheap foreign labor at the expense of bA's. They can't get bA's to take the jobs because they have to pay a living wage.

Ironically, the amnesty will also fit into the Dems strategy and drastically increase the social service areas. The Pubs vote for hiring the illegals for cheap labor. The Dems vote for hiring the illegals to increase the socialistic programs. Both win. Actually, all 3 win--Dems, Pubs, illegals. Who loses? bA tax payers who have to pick up the slack in more social programs to subsidize the illegals to bring their standard of living and care up to the level of other Americans.

So, choose your poison: Get screwed in higher subsidizing taxes by the Republicans or get screwed in more subsidized social programs by the Democrats.

[spodefly]

I appreciate your post, but showing that no Americans applied for the job is different than showing that no Americans "wanted" the job. Semantics (in this instance) but I am sure some American somewhere would "want" almost any job.

[ravingnutter]

Been happening for years with the H1B program. Employer just signs a paper stating no local applicants available. Then they can hire foreign for must less than they would have to pay otherwise.

I don't know what the rules were in the 80's, but I know what they are now...they must pay they prevailing wage.

Wage Requirement

On the Labor Condition Application (LCA) the employer must attest that it will pay "no less than the greater of the following" :

(a) The actual wage level paid to all other individuals at the work site with similar experience and qualifications for the position in question; OR (b) The prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the area of intended employment.

Source

And I don't believe any employer would want to risk the following fines and/or sanctions if they are audited on the recruitment attestation:

H1B-dependent employers and willful violators (defined below) must attest that they have taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry-wide standards, and that they have offered job to any equally/better qualified U.S. applicant. Violations subject to $35,000 fine and 3-year debarment filing immigrant and nonimmigrant petitions.

Source

[international american]

"Ironically, the amnesty will also fit into the Dems strategy and drastically increase the social service areas. The Pubs vote for hiring the illegals for cheap labor. The Dems vote for hiring the illegals to increase the socialistic programs. Both win. Actually, all 3 win--Dems, Pubs, illegals. Who loses? bA tax payers who have to pick up the slack in more social programs to subsidize the illegals to bring their standard of living and care up to the level of other Americans.

So, choose your poison: Get screwed in higher subsidizing taxes by the Republicans or get screwed in more subsidized social programs by the Democrats."

Nuff said right there!!