The H-1B swindle

http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/25/44OPreality_1.html ^

[vrwc0915]

It appears there is hard evidence to prove that employers are using the H-1B visa program to hire cheap labor; that is, to pay lower wages than the national average for programming jobs.

According to “The Bottom of the Pay Scale: Wages for H-1B Computer Programmers — F.Y. 2004,” a report by Programmers Guild board member John Miano, non-U.S. citizens working in the United States on an H-1B visa are paid “significantly less than their American counterparts.” How much less? “On average, applications for H-1B workers in computer occupations were for wages $13,000 less than Americans in the same occupation and state.”

Miano based his report on OES (Occupational Employment Statistics) data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which estimates wages for the entire country by state and metropolitan area. The report’s H-1B wage data came from the U.S. Department of Labor’s H-1B disclosure Web site.

Miano went out of his way to be balanced, and whenever possible he gave the benefit of the doubt to the employer. For example, he used OES data from 2003 because this is the wage information that would have been available to the employers when filing an LCA (labor condition application).

Miano had some difficulty matching OES job codes with LCA job titles, which employers typically create. Where both the OES and the LCA listed a job as “programmer/analyst,” Miano took the conservative approach of assuming that the LCA was describing a programmer, a job title that typically earns a lower wage than a systems analyst.

Nonetheless, Miano’s report shows that wages paid to H-1B workers in computer programming occupations had a mean salary of $52,312, while the OES mean was $67,700; a difference of $15,388. The report also lists the OES median salary as $65,003, or $12,691 higher than the H-1B median.

When you look at computer job titles by state, California has one of the biggest differentials between OES salaries and H-1B salaries. The average salary for a programmer in California is $73,960, according to the OES. The average salary paid to an H-1B visa worker for the same job is $53,387; a difference of $20,573.

Here are some other interesting national wage comparisons: The mean salary of an H-1B computer scientist is $78,169, versus $90,146 according to the OES. For an H-1B network analyst, the mean salary is $55,358, versus the OES mean salary of $64,799. And for the title “system administrator,” there was a $17,478 difference in salary between the H-1B mean and the OES mean.

H-1B visa workers were also concentrated at the bottom end of the wage scale, with the majority of H-1B visa workers in the 10-24 percentile range. “That means the largest concentration of H-1B workers make less than [the] highest 75 percent of the U.S. wage earners,” the report notes.

While it would be difficult to prove that any one particular employer is hiring foreign workers to pay less, the statistics show us that, for whatever reason, this is exactly what is happening on a nationwide basis. Miano says lobbyists will admit that a small number of companies are abusing the H-1B program, but what he has found in this research is that almost everyone is abusing it.

“Abuse is by far more common than legitimate use,” he says.

[TopQuark]

Frankly we should all be proud of any kid, with nothing more than a high school diploma, that can negotiate such a salary. If the hiring manager was snowballed by such an individual then he would in fact be a dipshit.

I guess, there is a simple misunderstanding here. I was not talking about one of two kids making obnoxiously high salaries --- I was talking about average salaries (classified by experience level) in the industry.

It was the market demand and limited supply that drove salaries that high.

Who was paying those salaries? It's a mistake to think (as socialist always do) that it was corporations. Corporations are merely pipelines: it was consumers (all of Americans) and shareholders (more than one half of all Americans) that paid that extra salary. Has a single sole complained that it is unfair for a 20-year-old kid who cannot even read well be paid $150,000 by some retiree and consumers? Nobody even mentioned that. Neither did I: I don't know any forces that work better than the market; I programmers get high salaries --- well then, it's unavoidable; let them have a party. But now the market forces have taken care of the shortage: the supply is up, the salaries are down. Now those people are whining.

I hope it's clear now that I was not talking about some kid that lives on my block.

[TopQuark]

Excellent post, Patriot! I hope Paul Ross learns something from it. If I may add a small detail --- and it is indeed small compared to the main points that you made: as far as I know (I am not an expert on the CPI), even those 70% of the population that do OWN are actually included into the CPI via "rent-expenditure equivalent," which translates housing expenditures associated with an owned asset (such as mortgage, as you pointed out) into a comparable expenditure on a rented asset.

But you simply cannot argue with conspiracy-theorist: it's much easier to assume a conspiracy --- the government, in cahout with tens of thousand of economists around the world, is falsifying the inflation data --- than to study the issue. I guess playing a detective in uncovering that evil conspiracy gives to Paul Ross the meaning of life. He will not listen to the facts, even when you present them so well.

[Toddsterpatriot]

even those 70% of the population that do OWN are actually included into the CPI via "rent-expenditure equivalent,"

I realize that. The gold bug post of Paul's that I responded to claimed they weren't included properly because CPI uses "owner equivalent rent" rather than housing prices, I guess, and that therefore CPI was vastly understated. My point was that a 10% rise in housing prices can't be said to be equal to a 10% jump in CPI (or 42% of 10%) because most people who own homes have owned them for a while.

I guess playing a detective in uncovering that evil conspiracy gives to Paul Ross the meaning of life. He will not listen to the facts, even when you present them so well.

Paul is tame compared to most of the tin foilers. His problems are his data dumps, 30 pages of trash we're supposed to slog thru, and his use of big words he obviously doesn't understand which add nothing to the discussion.

[TopQuark]

My point was that a 10% rise in housing prices can't be said to be equal to a 10% jump in CPI (or 42% of 10%) because most people who own homes have owned them for a while.

Thanks, I understand better now what you were trying to do.

P.S. Sorry I screwed up the terminology when referring to owner-equivalent rent (my memory did not serve me well, obviously).

[GOP_1900AD]

Thanks!

[LowCountryJoe]

Proverbs 14:7. I know it's hard to do but sometimes it is a much more constructive use of time. However, I also understand the urge to try and educate/persuade is very powerful; but, you must also remember that this is only possible with the rational portion of the population.

[Paul Ross]

My point was that a 10% rise in housing prices can't be said to be equal to a 10% jump in CPI (or 42% of 10%) because most people who own homes have owned them for a while.

And that point fails. First, you disregard the impacts on those actively buying houses...as if there is nothing to see there. Then you ignore the fact that at some point, everyone needs to change housing. Adding on rooms. Fixing things (windows, roofs, siding, sidewalks, driveways, garage floors, heating and A/C plants, flooring) Moving. Etc. And if the production cost has gone through the roof, well, that is only the problem of those people buying houses. But the impact of a "bubble" is far beyond that narrow segment. So again, your logic is flawed right at the conceptual level. And you have shown no actual competing data. Remember, the truism that no man is an island? Your febrile attempt to say the opposite is Wrong.

And how is it that your own data dumps are not totally irrelevant...particularly since they lack relevant or pertinent data? Mine are at least relevant, hence you merely attempt to disparage them...and never do actually or honestly "slog through them." Biassed to the end, Todd. Your nit-picking never has won a single issue.

And BTW, vis-a-vis language: You alone are responsible for your own personal insecurity with an impoverished and anemic vocabulary.

[Toddsterpatriot]

And that point fails.

So you claim a 10% rise in housing prices translates into what % jump in CPI?

First, you disregard the impacts on those actively buying houses...as if there is nothing to see there.

What % are actively buying houses? What is the impact on them?

Then you ignore the fact that at some point, everyone needs to change housing.

If I don't change houses for 10 years, housing inflation does not impact me until 2015.

Adding on rooms. Fixing things (windows, roofs, siding, sidewalks, driveways, garage floors, heating and A/C plants, flooring) Moving. Etc.

My point about housing said nothing about repairs. Obviously if repairs are more expensive that impacts CPI.

And if the production cost has gone through the roof, well, that is only the problem of those people buying new houses

That's what I said.

And you have shown no actual competing data.

Look to your own data dump. In post #212, the BLS numbers are superior to the goldbug numbers. Does BLS count as competing data?

And how is it that your own data dumps are not totally irrelevant.

I don't think I've ever dumped more than a page in any post. You regularly dump pages and pages with no indication of what you think the relevant portion might be. Formatting is your friend.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your nit-picking never has won a single issue.

Your misunderstanding of money supply was far from a nit, BTW. How's that dollar debauchment working for you lately?

[Paul Ross]

How's that dollar debauchment working for you lately?

Actually, it is happening as you type. Bought any houses lately?

Anyways, keeping in mind that many Euro countries are manipulating their currency downward is a frantic effort to prop up their jobs as well, while the U.S. pushes the other way at times. Hence, you need to look to other measures that have been less subjected to governmental manipulation ( U.S. interest rates, for example ) to gain a better sense of the relative vectors of change over time.

As you know from previous discussion, I am a gold skeptic, rather than a gold bug, as it declined from the high of like $830 an ounce in a speculative burst in 1980. But the last five years have been pretty telling.

ForGold:

For Platinum:

For silver:

Okay, now all commodity prices can be subject to individual variables such as supply, like foreign disruptions in mining, or demand, speculative bubbles. Etc. But check out the ongoing inflation in the value of U.S. farmland Todd...this despite the anemia of US agricultural farm income

Or of Dollar Decline against more stable currencies.

Canada's for example:

Spin, Todd, Spin.

[hobbes1]

H1B applications are public documents by definition. The employer must post, publicly, their intentions to sponsor an applicant for a specific position (listing the salary) and accept applications from US citizens for the same job.

Right. So a corporation gets up a second firm, that hires only H1B workers, posts the required docs, but who sees them ?

[Paul Ross]

So you claim a 10% rise in housing prices translates into what % jump in CPI?

Read, Todd, Read.

[blueriver]

The best foreign-born minds that serve on faculties of OUR universities educates and mentor thousand of OUR youth --- each of them, that is. The atomic bomb that allowed us to save hundreds of thousands of American lives and subsequently defended us against Russia was built almost entirely by foreigners. It was also a foreigner, Albert Einstein, that convinces the president to build it. I can give a myriad of examples. The problem is, you know those examples, too, but chose to disregard them entirely in your evaluation of the program.

My opinion is and always will be that immigration to this country served this country well when we were a new nation and we needed immigrants to get things done. Now that our population is at the level it is, I say we do not need any more immigration AT ALL. In my opinion ALL immigration at this point in time is a social and economic and quality of life burden placed on Americans. Bringing scientists over here for the development of the Atomic bomb is a far cry from what goes on in the name of the H-1b program. And regarding those professors that are teaching in our colleges - I find it hard to believe there are not the same talent existing in America.

[Toddsterpatriot]

I guess if you don't answer the question you are marginally less likely to look stupid. Keep up the good work!

[logician2u]

. . Programmers Guild . .

Just what's needed to "protect" coders is a good, old-fashioned labor union.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Unions did so well protecting steel workers, coal miners, watchmakers, textile mill workers and lately, airline pilots from the Big Bad Corporations that were out to exploit them and make them work long hours for low pay.

Not to mention - but I will - raising pay and benefits to make American factory workers the envy of the rest of the world. The rest of the world was so envious, in fact, that they streamlined manufacturing and cut labor costs even as US was going the other way. There's a good reason Japanese cars and motorcycles have taken an increasing market share since the 1970s, and it's got nothing to do with fuel economy.

Unionize American programmers and see how long their jobs last in a worldwide software industry.

(You don't s'pose this John Miano fellow might be a Democrat, do you?)

[blueriver]

It was the market demand and limited supply that drove salaries that high.

As it is supposed to work.

Who was paying those salaries? It's a mistake to think (as socialist always do) that it was corporations.

The consumer pays - but that is part of the game. Just like the consumer pays for the baseball salaries, the movie star salaries, the Dr. salaries ect.

Corporations are merely pipelines: it was consumers (all of Americans) and shareholders (more than one half of all Americans) that paid that extra salary. Has a single sole complained that it is unfair for a 20-year-old kid who cannot even read well be paid $150,000 by some retiree and consumers? Nobody even mentioned that. Neither did I:

So why should this profession be treated differently than any other profession, where the market demand and the supply dictate the salary?

I don't know any forces that work better than the market; I programmers get high salaries --- well then, it's unavoidable; let them have a party. But now the market forces have taken care of the shortage: the supply is up, the salaries are down. Now those people are whining.

This is where you an I have a fundamental difference of opinion. The market forces changed nothing. It was the government intervention, via immigration policies that changed the supply and therefore the market conditions. There is nothing about that that is capitalistic. It is sheer government intervention into the supply/demand ratio. And I do not consider it whining to demand that the government stop poking it's nose where it does not belong.

[abigailsmybaby]

"During a debate on Wednesday afternoon to determine whether the Senate should go ahead and increase skilled labor importation by more than 350,000 EACH YEAR. Sen. Byrd's amendment was met with approval by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and dismissed by Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA).

Sen. Byrd's amendment for the American worker was officially co-sponsored by Sen. Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Durbin (D-IL)."

Senator Byrd's amendment would have stripped the 350,000 increase from the bill, but it was defeated.

[TopQuark]

Thank you for the reminder. You are absolutely correct, of course.

[1rudeboy]

From 1999 to 2003 the median wage of the bottom 80% of the population dropped 4% in real terms.

How can a median wage drop 4% for a portion of a population? What am I missing here?

[coladirienzi]

You can compute the median wage for Blacks, Catholics, Left-handed Lesbian Windshield Installers, or any other identifiable group, for which the pertinent records are kept.

The bottom 80% of the population is just another group.

The median wage of just about any group will change over time. Unfortunately, for the bottom 80% of the population, it went down 4% from 1999 to 2003, in real, inflation-adjusted terms. This while the total economy is growing nicely.

This should not be a Democrat/Republican, liberal/conservative, scream and yell, pointing fingers blame game.

There is something, or some effect, in the economy, that is screwing over the middle-class, and, whatever it is, we need to identify it, and clip it in the bud, before our middle class gets a nice taste of Mexican peonage. (Shoot, maybe that IS the idea.)