Posted on 01/18/2006 8:26:15 AM PST by A. Pole
Research finds US H1B visa holders paid less
26 October 2005According 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.
[...snip...]
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.
I got a BSEE in 1979, and went into controls systems engineering. Multidiscipline field that is NOT taught in college (in spite of claims of curriculum). I am not only working with control systems wiring and software, but also hydraulics, chemical process, heat transfer, power, as well as mechanical areas. The engineering schools still do not teach how to tie everything together.
Which leads into another thing I notice with new grads, and also ties into the HR mentality. Some of these new grads, even with a few years experience, see something new and lock up. "I never had a course on that". Engineers who use this excuse I think missed the boat while they were in school. What is covered is the basics, and if the engineer was really paying attention he would go to the basics, read the manual, ask some good educated questions, and figure it out. No, they need to be spoon fed. Some of this I suspect is the view by some that engineering is just a stepping stone to management, just do some resume polishing, get into a management position, and forget everything technical after that. I have seen a lot of upper management and executive types follow that track. Of course I say this, and I am a business partner in a new industrial automation company - yet I still have to go out and troubleshoot systems.
Are you sure many engineers don't make that? My son is pulling in $46+ an hour as electrical engineer, Drexel U. grad.
I don't know what most engineers make but do believe it takes some brain power and self-discipline to graduate, in his case with honors, as an electrical engineer.
Maybe you should recheck your sources.
That's unconscionable!
Thanks for the laugh!
It sure does! The NEA is a prime example. Off topic but I've questioned myself on why no one has established a lobby to fight against the arrogant waste of taxpayers' earnings, stolen IMO to satisfy the voracious appetites of those controlling the public school system in our country.
We constantly hear and read of the failure of so many of these schools, but the NEA defends their position with a tenacity. Their cry is "more money, more money". Anyone paying attention knows this is not the answer to the problem.
But, oh, how easy it is to dip into the pockets of U.S. citizens... an endless line of credit. It infuriates me.
With that risk adverse / zero-investment mindset, I'd say you are definitely more of an administrator, and a lot LESS of a Businessman/person or Leader.
Bullseye! He wants other suckers to invest while he hopes to collect dividends from their investments.
spot on fella!
As stated earlier, there is no "shortage". It's really "I am not willing to pay what I need to in order to attract the level of talent I want"
My husband is an engineer....(Georgia Tech)....thorough educations, both of them.
Word up!
Then, Ga. Tech is an exception to the rule. I've worked in high tech for over 30 years and this is the trend I have experienced. RF and analog circuitry are typically not available in the majority of engineering schools across the US. The situation became so acute that in the 90s, the wireless telephony companies combined to create GWEC, the Global Wireless Education Consortium to develop and re-introduce RF technology at the university level for engineers who might want to travel that path.
More recently, employers providing RF-based telecommunications systems/services have been struggling to find qualified RF engineers due to the paucity of the available pool. That's why internal cross-training is emerging as a growing initiative in many of these companies to train newer engineer empployees in these technologies because the majority of qualified RF and analog engineering professors have long since retired and been replaced by digital and computer engineers.
Finally, I would note that the engineering graduates from many of todays engineering colleges don't lack good educations, in most cases they simply weren't able to avail themslves of RF and/or analog courses because their school didn't offer those courses.
..is now a licensed engineer...(those are few and far between)
He is simply brilliant, a hard worker and put himself through college.
LOL I've heard a few variations on the "half-life" of an engineering education versus other fields like math or engrish lit. In my case the half-life of my education was about a week.
YOU SAID..."I will NOT invest money on getting some engineer with outdated skill (as most are when they graduate from college) up to the point where they now have enough skill to receive and benefit from the new market demand driven technology. If you don't have the latest skills.... which you are NOT going to get from a college, don't even bother applying for the position."
This statement alone doesnt make any sense. I wonder how much YOU know about managing or leading people, in particular, technical people.
Or perhaps you have a solution, in search of a problem...the solution is ASIA.
Business is built on relationships...PEOPLE...relationships not only with your clients or customers, but your employees as well.
Take the time to do some research, and study up on a guy who these days has gone out the window...HERTZBERG, specifically, his theory on MOTIVATION.
See my post 141 prior.
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.