LOBBYING FAILS, H-1B VISA CAP FALLS to 65,000

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 01, 2003 12:53:47 PM ]via India TImes ^ | OCTOBER 01, 2003 12:53:47 PM | K YATISH RAJAWAT/ECONOMICTIMES.COM

[11th_VA]

MUMBAI: The annual cap for H-1B visas will now be 65,000. This is a sharp drop from the earlier limit of 195,000 visas.

The US plans to enforce this rule from October 1, 2003.

The Indian IT industry has been lobbying hard to freeze H-1B visa limits at current levels. However, these efforts which had the support of some US corporations to retain H-1B visa limits have failed. (Will Europe be the next big hunting ground for Indian IT pros?)

Indian IT professionals are among the largest users of H-1B visas, as US Big Tech shops big from this technical pool. The H1-B visa cap was raised to 195,000 in 02. This particular legislation had a 'sunset' clause. According to this clause, the limit would have (automatically) lapsed on October 1, 2003. Ergo, the H1-B visa annual cap will now fall back to 65,000 visas.

The H1-B visa issue has generated a lot of controversy in the US. Several trade unions representing (local) technology workers have been lobbying against these work permits. The slowdown in the high-tech industry combined with an overall drop in US economic growth has resulted in a number of job losses.

H1-B visa users have been at the receiving end of criticism from unemployed American professionals for taking away their jobs. These visa users are also seen as representative of the trend towards offshore outsourcing trade jargon for moving to cheaper locations like India which is also under flak for spiriting away US jobs.

The visa was created in the early 1950s to give skilled foreign workers a permit to reside in the United States. The H1-B category was added in 1990 to give foreign workers an opportunity to pick up a job with the intention of remaining permanently in the United States.

In 1999, under pressure from high-tech companies and other manufacturers, Congress expanded the limit from 65,000 to 115,000. It raised the cap again to 215,000 in 00 and to 195,000 in 01 and 02.

Top Indian companies have been curtailing the use of H1-B visas for sending employees to the US. Ergo, it unlikely that the offshore outsourcing trend will be affected. Most companies have shifted to the use of L-1 visas (used for intra-company transfers). However, companies whose basic revenue model is supplying manpower to US corporations, ( body-shoppers, are likely to be hit by this move.

[snippy_about_it]

Thank goodness, not to get rid of it altogether!

Thank goodness, NOW to get rid of it altogether!

[Marauder]

My main point is that if I'm going to lose in a contest between myself and a foreign worker, I'd rather lose because his knowledge and experience is more extensive than because he's cheaper and easier to keep as well as a member of some minority group.

If anyone wants to keep foreigners out because they are afraid the foreigners are better than they are, that's their devil to wrestle, not mine. But I'm not picking up that fear from most of the posters here. What I'm seeing is the same concern as my own, for the most part: Being beat out because of unfair advantage, which you seem to support.

[Jerr]

65,000 still sounds like it is more than what is truly needed to meet our shortage of workers trained in the latest technology!!!!!!

The problem is fast change of technology and everybody has to be on the bleeding edge. What about training our own workers through on-the-job and community colleges. You won't know the new technology unless someone teaches you or allows you the opportunity to learn.

But so much for the short-sighted CEOs and upper management squeezing their pennies while burning their dollars. Just so that they meet their objectives; don't worry about what is best for the company overall --- maybe the best thing for the company is a new CEO who will act like a leader and actively manage the business. Oh, well, too much dreaming!!!

If we trained our own citizens and hired those that are trained rather than importing the lastest Indian special, maybe our industries would actually expand and grow from innovation. Long-term cost savings without any reinvestment in the company only produces a commodity product and in that case, unless you are the lowest price producer of an adequate product you will consistently be undercut. So much for cost savings!

Wonder why we have such a stagnant economy when it is suppose to be growing?????

[Jerr]

Economic efficiency is not subsidies by foreign governments or competing with government-owned industries. Economic efficiencies are GAINED by investing overseas while not reinvesting and modernizing domesticly.

Unfortuantely economic efficiency is gained by specialization of labor and division of labor. However, lately the big companies keep getting better and then forget how to manage their own company. They start to get fat and lazy due to the increasing lack of domestic competition. That is when they lose the efficiency edge that they initially developed. Then it is either left to a small company to produce innovation or a foreign company that can produce a comparablely perceived product cheaper.

[JohnSmithee]

"The problem is fast change of technology and everybody has to be on the bleeding edge."

Actually, technology change has really slowed down in the last few years. There is very little of "bleeding" edge technology out there. Perhaps XML and e-commerce could still be considered bleeding edge but not much else.

[A. Pole]

Actually, technology change has really slowed down in the last few years. There is very little of "bleeding" edge technology out there.

As the center of information technology moves to India and China, will the technological advances speed up or slow down?

[null and void]

Geeeee I don't know.

Take the epicenter from a young country with a history of innovation, one that practically invented the idea of ownership, patents and rewards for intelectual property, and move it to old countries with "caste" in concrete social institutions and a history of persecuting anyone who rocks the boat.

What do you think?

[BeerSwillr]

Hey-hey

Two good things happened on this thread.

News of the new H1B cap.

That idiot Texas_Dawg account was banned.

What a deal.

heh-heh-heh

[GOP_1900AD]

Thank you SO MUCH for revealing your true agenda you Leftist intruder! You unwittingly revealed your mission with the post I am responding to! [Folks - see that? "This is FR. It's one of the most anti-Bush, anti-capitalist sites I've ever seen on the net. " Now why would Texas_Judas want to create such an impression? Who benefits? Who loses if such an impression were to be created, thereby causing even more schism within the Right than already exists?]

[GOP_1900AD]

RE: "you will continue to be dismissed by the socialist who think you represent everything evil about capitalist." I suspect that Texas_Judas' true agenda is to paint exactly such a picture regarding capitalists and more precisely conservatives. He is playing the stereotypical role of the Rightist according to what Leftists believe. This is a very incidious form of discrediting, the tactic of discreditation via alleged inclusion in the group targetted for smearing, followed by premeditated bad behavior. [BAD DOG! BAD DOG! ;)]

[GOP_1900AD]

Technology is constructively chaotic (some actually would use the term positively disruptive) and creates not only new opportunities and markets, but also help countries like the USA, which have never had nor developed thickly layered power structures and protective strata, geopolitical power. This whole game is geopolitical; the strategy changed during the 1990s from trying to defeat the US / West via solely military and insurgent means, to defeating us by taking ownership of.... THE MEANS OF TECHNOLOGY. This is a subset of the MEANS OF PRODUCTION. Where is this all heading?

[JohnSmithee]

"As the center of information technology moves to India and China, will the technological advances speed up or slow down?"

Hard to say on that one. The explosion of client-server computing in the business world made it possible for so many other related technologies to become possible. There doesn't seem to be anything like that in the near future but possibly in 10 to 15 years.

[JohnSmithee]

"someone who thinks their job can't be outsourced. As techies did five years ago."

I knew it was coming but I thought we had a good 15 years to go. Amazing how things changed in the span of a few years.

[JohnSmithee]

"That idiot Texas_Dawg account was banned.

What a deal."

I knew something was wrong when his responses slowed down. Just figured I was number 40 or so on his reply list.

[null and void]

Where is this all heading?

Serfdom

[Dutchy]

ping..

[Bikers4Bush]

Wrong Steel is.

[YankeeReb]

I'm a stockbroker.

And you think you're immune to outsourcing because....????

[YankeeReb]

No flames here. You've summed it up perfectly.