Senate Panel Votes to boost H-1B visa limit by 30,000

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has approved an extra 30,000 foreign-worker visas for 2006 under a visa program popular with many technology companies, but the increase was halved from an earlier committee proposal. The committee yesterday approved legislation that would expand the cap on H-1B skilled-worker visas from 65,000 to 95,000 in the U.S. government's fiscal year 2006. The legislation, supported by several IT vendors, expands the H-1B cap by "recapturing" unused visas from past years going back to the early 1990s.

The extra visas would be available in years when the H-1B cap has been reached, as it has for fiscal 2006.

A Judiciary Committee draft proposal circulated in the past week would have allowed up to 60,000 more H-1B visas a year, but Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) pushed for a smaller increase. A Feinstein spokesman wasn't immediately available for comment today.

The 65,000 cap for H-1B visa applications in the U.S. government's fiscal 2006 was reached about two months before the new fiscal year began on Oct. 1. Congress allowed 195,000 H-1B visas in the government's fiscal year 2003, but then let the cap fall back to its pre-dot-com boom level of 65,000.

The Judiciary Committee legislation, which would have to be approved by the full Senate as well as the House of Representatives, also includes a $500 increase in the H-1B application cost. The current cost is $3,185.

Technology trade groups, including the Information Technology Association of America and Information Technology Industry Council Inc., had pushed for more H-1B visas, saying U.S. companies need to be able to recruit workers from around the world to compete in a global economy. The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), another trade group, and Microsoft Corp. applauded the committee's support of more visas.

SIIA President Ken Wasch called the need for additional technology workers "urgent" for U.S. companies.

"Despite concerns that the number of additional H-1B visas was cut in half ... SIIA believes that the proposal represents an interim solution for immediate U.S. workforce needs while also providing necessary revenue for the federal government," Wasch said in a statement. "Both of these objectives are consistent with the goal of positioning the U.S. for continued global leadership in innovative technology."

Supporters of more H-1B visas also pointed to benefit for U.S. workers, with $1,500 of each visa application fee going toward U.S. worker training programs. The committee's decision "will give U.S. business more ability to compete, succeed, remain competitive and provide new revenue for training U.S. workers and for deficit reduction," Jack Krumholtz, Microsoft's managing director for federal government affairs, said in a statement.

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.-USA (IEEE-USA), representing U.S. IT workers, had opposed an increase in the H-1B cap. IEEE-USA would have preferred no increase, but "30,000 is better than 60,000," said Chris McManes, a spokesman for the organization.

Current law allows for a 20,000-visa exception to the H-1B visa cap for graduate students, and close to 8,000 student H-1B visas remain unused, McManes said. "Industry says it only wants to bring in the 'best and brightest,' yet thousands of the 20,000 extra visas ... are not currently being used," he said. "If they were only seeking the best and brightest, shouldn't these visas fill up first?"

In June, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics reported job losses in five major engineering and computer job classifications in the first quarter of 2005. Compared with the 2004 average employment, the number of U.S. computer hardware engineers dropped by 18,000 in the first quarter of 2005, a loss of 19% of those jobs from the same period in 2004. The number of employed computer software engineers dropped by 13,000, and the number of computer programmers, electrical and electronics engineers, and computer and information systems managers also dropped in the first quarter, according to government statistics.

Offsetting the loss of 52,000 jobs in those five categories was a gain of 54,000 jobs among computer scientists and systems analysts, according to government statistics.

IEEE-USA argued that the numbers show thousands of unemployed U.S. IT workers. "Part of the reason the additional visas aren't needed is because of the abundance of unemployed U.S. tech workers," McManes said. "That the cap for 2006 has already been reached doesn't show demand, it shows that U.S. companies aren't even looking for Americans first."

Uhhhhhh-HUH. Right.

Here's a little hint, from somebody (a) who works with a bunch of folks on these visas, and (b) whose wife used to work for an immigration lawyer...they don't. Employers have creative ways of getting around it.

For example, employers are supposed to "assure" that no American citizens are available in their area for the job in question. Well, where I was working until last year, we had a glut of tech workers due to financial troubles at a local company that had downsized hundreds of people. So my company wrote the job requirements to tailor them EXACTLY to the H-1B applicant they'd already decided they were going to hire. No one else could fit them. They might as well have written "Must be guy named Pradesh Unpronouncable from Bangalore, 5'6", 145 pounds, coming here on a one-year visa."

And as for the whole "prevailing wage" thing...they slip around that too. What my former employer would do was simply list the job a few pay grades lower than if they were hiring an employee to do it. So similar work to what I was doing at "grade 14" for $66k, would be listed on the H-1B paperwork as being done by a "grade 12" at $50k--senior-level stuff, that no $50k American programmer could probably have the experience to do. Now, whether that's what they were paying the visa applicant's contracting company, or whether that's what the guy himself was being paid, I have no idea. But they had to list the salary on the Federal paperwork that was posted in a public area for a period of time before the visa applicant could start work.

I don't have a problem with folks coming here from foreign countries and working; I'd better not, because where I work now is probably 30% Indian with another 10% Oriental (Japanese/Korean/Vietnamese/Chinese), and with very few exceptions they are as professional, as pleasant, as skilled, and as competent as any native-born American. What I do have a problem with is companies bringing these folks in by the thousands while it's hard as hell for citizens to get ANY tech job, even if they're willing to take a pay cut and put up with the crap you have to put up with in this industry.

From a purely economic capitalistic standpoint, yeah, bringing in cheap outsourced labor makes sense for the business owner. But dammit, there comes a point, even in capitalism, where the good of your country and its citizens has GOT to be factored in.

Oh, and by the way...the biggest moneymakers off this whole scam are not the businesses. It's, not surprisingly, LAWYERS. My wife worked in an immigration lawyer's office, and he was paid by the companies, not the immigrants, to deal with the INS (now DHS) and the immense and complex maze of paperwork and BS that had to be done to get somebody to work in this country. It's not easy. Getting a foreigner in here to work is a maze of red tape, a long and difficult process. And the lawyers are making a total killing off of it every step of the way.

}:-)4

I wonder where most of these H-1B workers are from and how much they are being paid compared to the same skillset available locally ...

==========================================================================

Until recently, my employer was Computer Sciences Corporation. They are an "IT Vendor", a.k.a. outsourcer. Their business model is to take over a company's IT operation, at a fixed, unbelievably low per-hour bid price, and then reduce costs by "improving productivity". There's two ways to improve productivity, (1) invest in resources (i.e. people), hardware, software, and other tools to make each "resource" more productive, or (2) work with fewer people, or employ people who will accept less compensation.

First off, let me tell you that CSC is no worse than most IT companies, except that they have NO BUSINESS MODEL for actually improving productivity, other than requiring employees to work over 40 hours a week, and 6-7 days a week, or outsourcing to foreign workers. In typical outsourcing situations, they "hire" all the client companies IT workers, the good, bad, and deadwood, and as soon as contractually possible, begin laying off older workers (over 40 yrs, senior, and highest paid) and deadwood. Then they replace these people with U.S. citizens who are off-site (if the client site location is in a high cost area), foreign born IT workers from their "consulting" arm (CSI) (a.k.a. labor importer) under the guise of new projects requiring "special" hard to find skills, "insource" workers from their Indian and other foreign corporations ("L" visa's - no limit), use remote overseas resources (again, India) if the contract will allow, or will simply find some local person willing to accept 60% of the local salary market.

It doesn't require a rocket scientist (or, much of a "manager") to figure out that if you underbid the contract by 20% of the client company's fixed cost, lay off half of the resources, and add back others workers who work for 40% to 60% of the market rate, you're going to make a killing (though, CSC management frequently fails to make margins even under those favorable conditions, because of byzantine bureaucracy and incompetence).

And, if you're one of the higher paid and/or senior folks they've decided to retain because you have skills they just can't (or don't want to) reproduce with a cheaper hire, God help you. They won't train anyone over 40, but they sure as hell will work you to death (which was pretty much my case). Every Thursday or Friday, even though I put in 35-40 hours by Thursday night, I'd have "weekend" work or "coverage" added. I managed my area pretty well, so I could have limited such work to perhaps a half dozen to ten weekends a year (after all, IT production support does require IT workers to "support" the IT when the business users are not using them). However, my manager routinely assigned me to projects I had nothing to do with (because I was "Senior"). After 4-5 years, I had to routinely cancel vacations, work 50-60 hour, 6-7 day weeks, and again, the extra project work had nothing to do with my primary role. It was just another way to work with fewer works, add "client-billable" hours to my timesheet, and increase profits. Management's goal (I presume) was to ensure I had 20-30% higher billable hours than the national average (2300-2500 hours per year, excluding of "vacation", sick leave, and other overhead hours).

Bottom line is, first, these IT companies are the modern day equivalent of 19th century sweatshops, and they know it. That is their business model. Second, foreign born IT workers are simple a management "device" to reduce labor costs and improve profits. The ancillary advantage is more than a "cheap" worker. A worker who's tied to a company by law for 3-5 years (i.e. before they can get a green card) is worth gold to the company. The company can abuse the worker (overtime, no time off, no vacations, etc.) and the worker will keep working for $30-60K in an economy (e.g. MA, CA, FL, etc.) where the average is $60-100K, in fear of their life the same way a foreign born prostitute will continue doing what she's doing. The alternative, i.e. returning home to a life with much less hope and opportunity, is unthinkable. Five years of indentured servitude is worth it to them, and after all, most of these "kids" are in their 20's - a 60+ hour week is not that big a deal in exchange for the opportunity. There is little turnover in projects who employ foreign born workers, and high "turnover" can kill an IT organization.

Of course, with half the staff laid off and replaced by indentured servants, the rest of the (generally American citizen) staff will work their little tails off in fear of losing their jobs, like all their co-workers before.

H1B's are almost irrelevant, because most of the large importers/corporations have long ago found other VISAs to get around those limits. H1Bs are usually used by "job shops" (or "body shops") who hire to fill positions, hiring at 30% of the market rate and selling at 90% of the market rate, using the difference to fund sales commissions up to $250K a year, as well as hefty profits.

This is what the U.S. Senate supports. This is the "deal". How many indentured servants should they let in to "maintain competitiveness". Enrollment at U.S. college and university IT programs has been dropping for 3-4 years, attributed due to the "DOT COM bust". The real reason is that American kids are smart enough to figure out that paying $120K+ for a college degree to find a $30-40K job is not cost-effective. Plus, some kids such as my own and my nephew have seen the adults in their lives go through the cycle, i.e. the long hours, layoffs, job insecurity, and age discrimination. Why would they want to follow in "dad's" footsteps?

"IT" will be a dead subject in the U.S. within 4-5 years. The H1B, "L", and similar programs will boost short term profits, but destroy the industry and/or push it off-shore.

SFS

I don't have a problem with folks coming here from foreign countries and working

=======================================================================

Nor do I. That's how the IT "pimps" frame the discussion. Anyone who's against unlimited IT worker immigration wants to either hamstring U.S. companies, or protect their own job because they're "deadwood".

I have worked in shops that were 95% foreign-immigrant (I was routinely the token American, because I had the talent and skills) for most of my 20+ year IT career. Actually, I worked with more Americans in my last job with CSC because they outsourced American jobs (though 90% of all new hires where immigrants).

I have many, close friends who are foreign nationals. They're great people, and I have no problem with the "best and brightest" from other countries getting their opportunity here. What I do have a problem with is the fat profits the American pimp companies make bringing these folks in.

It's all a matter of simple economics. If you bring in a guy from India where $5 a day is "middle class", and he has total freedom to negotiate his own deal, he'll eventually expect the same level of pay as American workers, because he's living in our economy. If the imported supply is truely unlimited, then, yes, supply will overwhelm demand (which was the case from '99 - '04), and all salaries will drop.

However, I'm less concerned with market forces driving salaries down, because the number of "best and brightest" are limited. Plus, the contributions of these individuals will create additional demand, through successful and growing companies.

The problem today with the H1B and other immigrant visa programs is that there's perverse market incentives involved. A company doesn't need to "create" or "product" if they can "buy low" and "sell high". These IT companies are more like junk bond and green mail speculators, than they are IT companies.

And unfortunately, most Senators have an IQ of about 80 in economic matters, and of course, no sense of ethics or the national good at all. They'll whore to the IT companies, buy their simple arguments about "maintaining competition", sell out the American IT worker, and enjoy their campaign contributions and $multi-million, taxpayer-paid lifestyle.

SFS

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.