Posted on 11/04/2017 3:36:24 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort has been granted 70 visas to bring in foreign workers for the winter season, The Palm Beach Post reports.
That’s a 9 percent increase from last year, when Mar-a-Lago hired 64 workers under the H-2B visa program. The new visas will go to 20 foreign cooks, 35 waiters and 15 maids and housekeepers for the 2017-18 tourist season, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. They’ll earn hourly wages from $10.33 (for the cleaners) to $13.34 (for the cooks). The temporary visas allow them to work from October 2017 to the end of May 2018.
A hallmark of Trump’s presidential campaign and a stated push of his administration is that U.S. companies should hire American workers. He has criticized Ford Motor Company, Carrier Corp. and others for moving manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Mar-a-Lago was applying for the foreign worker visas this July when the president launched “Made in America Week.”
Trump said at the time, “We believe jobs must be offered to American workers first. Does that make sense?”
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Ya, OK. Agriculture, and perhaps business in general are not your areas of expertice. And let’s not forget when you layoff your seasonal employees, they will collect unemployment too, adding to the cost of that lettuce.
I am well aware of what a temp job is. Regardless of the kind of job it is, you pay them a wage for it. If you can't find enough people for the salary you are offering then maybe that salary isn't enough to attract them? The answer should be increase the wage to the point where people will be interested in applying. But apparently the answer is to hire foreign workers who will work for less. So why is sending jobs overseas to cheaper foreign labor is bad but bringing that cheaper foreign labor into the U.S. to take jobs is good?
But on the plus side I understand the chocolate cake is out of this world.
H-1Bs are considered temporary workers as well. They are here on a fixed time frame. The only difference seems to be in duration. The purpose behind both programs is to pay the employee less than what a comparable U.S. worker would expect, creating savings to the company. So again, why is one good and the other bad?
That said, a smart US citizen would take one those jobs, and become such a good employee, that they would be crazy not to find a full time position for them at the end of the term.
Being a smart U.S. citizen would appear to disqualify them for the position.
Like I said 5 cents per head to pick it and it costs $2.50 in the store. You do the math.
Why wouldn't they, you ever play it?
Not sufficient people in the WPB area who are willing to take the temporary jobs at the salary he is offering, is what he means. Sure temp jobs aren't as desirable as full time jobs. There's an element of risk involved in accepting one. So you offset that risk by expecting better pay. Trump isn't willing to do that. So he imports instead.
No, and I highly doubt that they are allowed to either.
We don’t agree often. But this one of those rare occasions.
That’s pretty good for seasonal work.
Especially when you're importing people to work at those wages.
Ya think? Duhhhh!
My comment was what I call a "zooomer", it went right over your head...........
My initial post was an aside and merely a reflection of an encounter with a true "seasonal" employee but you had to take it a step further.......Sheesh!
“They are going for H-2B visa because they don’t want to pay Americans not that they can’t find them. “
They have to pass a drug screen. I’ll let you decide the impact that might have on hiring local hiring.
And this is just a guess, but I’d bet the main chefs are compensated well and are local. They hire bedchangers and line cooks for the season.
I work at a fine dining establishment. Finding people willing to work in food service is extremely difficult.
The owner has lost three chefs at two restaurants due to them having to work without the kitchen help they need. Few applicants and those who do often quit within months because it’s intense, fast paced, demanding, precise and the hours mean no normal social life.
The two chefs at my location have been doing an amazing job without a line cook for months, but both have one foot out the door because they have been doing what’s darn near impossible every night.
You don’t seem to be familiar with the industry.
And you wonder why $13.34 an hour doesn't attract a lot of people for a job like that?
If we charged enough to pay more, the restaurant would quickly go out of business. It would be too expensive. To make even a modest profit labor has to be at 20% or less. That’s difficult. We are service heavy with perishable product.
“So why is this good and an H-1B working for Disney bad?”
Disney might not be the best example, nor any other corp that forces the former employee to train his immigrant replacement.
However, the dif between H1b and H2b are obvious. H1b, is dual purpose, the holder is assumed to be permenant. A Green Card is usually applied for simultaneously, so we get to enjoy the diversity of the chain migration that is certain to follow.
H2b, lower skilled, seasonal non immigrant.
“Millennial trash mixed with the regular trash inhabitants of S Florida.”
Bingo. And a clean drug screen is required for the job.
So your restaurant is understaffed because people won't work for the money your employer is offering. And because your understaffed you keep losing more key people. And the arrived upon solution is to find people who will work harder for less money. Does that about sum it up?
An H-1B is, by definition, temporary. It is a three year permission to work here that can be extended once.
And Disney is a good example for our purposes. Yes, they outsourced their IT functions to a company which brought in a number of H-1Bs which Disney forced the very people that were being replaced to train. What people overlook is that the intent of the outsourcing is to take those H-1Bs and bring them back to India where they will train others and perform Disney's IT work in Chennai or Mumbai or wherever. So in other words, Disney is basically sending their work to a foreign country to be performed by lower-cost workers. Mar-a-Lago is bringing lower-cost foreign workers here to do their work. The justification for both is to save money. So why is one situation - sending work offshore - bad and the other situation - bring workers here - good?
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.