Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do We Still Need As Many H-1B Visas?: No
Front Page Magazine ^ | June 17, 2002 | Rep. Tom Tancredo

Posted on 06/18/2002 2:41:55 PM PDT by M 91 u2 K

THE H-1B PROGRAM is not necessary and actually is harmful to our nation's interests. The sooner Congress scales it back, the better.

Under heavy pressure from industry, Congress in 1998 raised the cap on H-1Bworker visas--issued mainly by technology companies seeking to import computer programmers--to nearly double the previous limit. Two years later,the cap was increased again, to 195,000 per year. But now that the tech boom has cooled off, this "temporary" worker program needs to be scaled back to its original size.

My proposal, the High-Tech Work Fairness and Economic Stimulus Act of 2001(H.R. 3222), would return us to the pre-1998 cap of 65,000 H-1B visas per year. This bill would allow further cap reductions pegged to the overallU.S. unemployment rate as determined by the Department of Commerce. Each year, the cap would be reduced by 10,000 visas for each quarter of a point above an unemployment rate of 6%.

Technology-company representatives claim soft demand is already reducing usage of these visas. This can only be described as a lie. In fiscal-year 2001, a record number of H-1B visas were issued, at least 70% more than inthe prior year. So at a time when the IT job market is drying up, with well over a half-million layoffs, employers have gone on a foreign-worker hiring binge. The tech industry appears to be using the economic downturn as an opportunity to replace American and legal immigrant workers with H-1B visa holders at an even faster pace.

Industry lobbyists base their claim of declining demand for H-1Bs on the fact that last year was apparently the first time the hiring cap was not reached before the year ended. The Immigration and Naturalization Service reported that 163,000 H-1B visas were issued, well short of the new 195,000 cap, though 40% higher than the number issued the previous year. But the 2000 law that increased the cap cleverly exempted H-1B visas issued to universities and other nonprofit organizations. The INS has concealed how many of these visas were issued, but the number was almost certainly large enough to push the total number of visas above the ostensible cap. In addition, the INS included 29,000 pending applications in the count for thefollowing fiscal year. Says B. Lindsay Lowell, former director of research at the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University, "The numbers of H-1Bs are up, and strongly so."

Importing hundreds of thousands of foreign workers at a time of growing unemployment in America is obviously absurd. But the mass issuance of H-1B visas would be a problem regardless of the state of the job market. Tech-industry officials have long claimed that H-1B visas were a stopgap measure until the high-tech labor shortage could be resolved through improved education and training for Americans. This has been the refrain since at least 1995, when the industry told Congress that H-1Bs would be needed only until laid-off defense-industry programmers and engineers could be retrained. Congress did provide funding for this education and retraining five years later, but the funding was attached to the 2000 bill that authorized the increase in H-1Bs. This "temporary stopgap while we retrain workers" line is a ruse, an attempt to dupe Congress and the public into continuing to allow the industry to draw on cheap and docile foreign labor. In fact, there isn't and hasn't been any pervasive, desperate software labor shortage. The only studies that assert the existence of such a shortage are sponsored by the tech industry and its allies; none of the governmental or academic explorations of this issue has ever found a shortage.

One indication that there is no shortage is the relatively low growth rate of programmer wages. A survey of average wages conducted by Deloitte & Touche Consulting during the tech boom, found annual increases of only 7% to 8% for programmers, hardly evidence of job demand drastically outpacing the supply of workers. Other occupations, by contrast, saw much larger salary increases. In the late 1990s, geographic surveyors, for example, saw their real wages increase at an annual rate of 20%, while dietitians' pay increased 17%.

Should we import foreign surveyors and dietitians, too? Obviously not; market economies operate by increasing the price of something in high demand until the supply increases sufficiently. We don't need the federal government to fine-tune such things as though this were the Soviet Union implementing a five-year plan.

What's more, high-tech employers hire only about 2% of applicants for software programming jobs, notes Norman Matloff, a computer-science professor at the University of California at Davis and a leading critic of the H-1B program. If employers were genuinely desperate for programmers, they couldn't afford to be so selective.

Of course, employers are free to hire anyone they want, with whatever set of skills they think best. But a capitalist labor market is a dialogue, not a monologue. Employers offer certain wages and benefits, employees counter with different demands, and they arrive at some mutually agreeable settlement. Importing large numbers of new workers into the American market changes the terms of that dialogue--with some disturbing results.

First of all, H-1B workers have obviously been a source of cheap labor. University studies have shown that H-1B programmers and engineers are paid 15% to 33% below the U.S. average, and the Wall Street Journal has reported that holders of H-1Bs are paid $20,000 to $25,000 less annually than comparably skilled Americans. Similar findings were issued in a 2000 report from the National Research Council.

Why are H-1B visa holders willing to work cheap? Here lies the genius of the program from the industry's point of view. H-1B workers aren't immigrants but temporary workers who remain in the United States only at the pleasure of their employers. The workers submit to this situation because the real payoff for them is not the salary they earn, but the chance to be sponsored by their employers for a green card, which would let them live permanently in the United States.

The immigration process takes several years, during which time the worker isn't likely to jeopardize his or her chances for a green card by demanding better pay or threatening to quit. This is, in effect, indentured servitude and it creates a strong incentive to accept lower pay.

A related consequence of the H-1B program's short-circuiting of the American labor market is the disposal of older workers. With a large pool of young H-1B workers unwilling to make too many demands of their employers, older American programmers face enormous obstacles. The evidence of age discrimination is undeniable, resulting in careers cut unnaturally short. It's very difficult for most programmers to get programming work after they pass the age of 40.

According to an analysis by professor Matloff published by the Center for Immigration Studies, the percentage of computer-science graduates working in software development drops sharply over time. Five years after finishing college, about 60% of computer-science graduates are working as programmers. Twenty years after college, when most are in their early 40s, the number falls to 19%.

This rapid attrition is in sharp contrast to other fields that employ fewer foreign workers: 52% of people who majored in civil engineering, for instance, are in the same field 20 years later--more than double the rate for computer-science majors. The perverse result is that a programmer is considered "senior" with just five years or so of experience--in other words, before the age of 30!

Thus, older programmers, who have the potential for more productive years of work, are forced into other work, in a kind of domestic "brain drain" that wastes the talents of American workers. This brain drain is both caused by and compensated for by a brain drain from overseas, especially India and China, that fosters dependence on foreign resources. Given the importance of technology not only to our economy but also to our nation's security, is it wise to promote dependence on the flow of programmers from abroad?

Today's H-1B program is not necessary for American technology companies to succeed, and is actually harmful to our national interests. The sooner it is scaled back, the better it will be for all of us.

Tom Tancredo represents Colorado’s sixth congressional district in the US House of Representatives.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: Marine Inspector
If this happens over and over, doesn't that become the new going rate?
41 posted on 06/18/2002 11:22:38 PM PDT by College Repub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
You're not describing the H1B program.

Well according to the immigration attorney the company frequently uses in such cases, it indeed was a H-1B visa. We had to "beef-up" this employee's resume so we could say he was doing "unique" work that an average Joe could not perform. Basically, we were told by the attorney that we had to justify why we would hire this guy over some US Citizen. In addition to the resume, we had to complete numerous gov’t forms. This was recently – in the 3rd qtr. 2001.

42 posted on 06/18/2002 11:42:10 PM PDT by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: College Repub
Yep, and it prices out the US workers.
43 posted on 06/19/2002 12:14:33 AM PDT by Marine Inspector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: gubamyster
Either your attorney is engaged in malpractice or you're misunderstanding your attorney's advice. There's no requirement that an H1B applicant be doing "unique" work. That's one route to a green card, but it's not part of the H1B program. I'd be more inclined to take your concerns about the program seriously if I thought there was half a chance you were straight on the facts.
44 posted on 06/19/2002 3:28:52 AM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FormerLurker
If your only reason for thinking that H1B's are "cheap labor" is your analogy with contracting out production with factories in China, then you've reached your opinion in ignorance of the requirements for an H1B. Aside: There's amazing programming talent in India. They have a good educational system and a lot of people going through it. If any firm is not taking the best and brightest from that pool of labor, they're putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage. If anything the Indian government should be complaining about a brain drain. They've paid for the education and American's are getting the benefit of it.
45 posted on 06/19/2002 3:39:38 AM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
They've paid for the education and American's are getting the benefit of it.

I was hired by a company along with several others to undo the hack job that they received from an Indian consulting firm. I've never seen such pathetic code before in my life. It took a team of 3 engineers along with a software architect 3 months to revamp the software so that it would function properly. There appeared to be a generally good concept in the design, but the implementation was extremely poor, resulting in massive memory leaks and memory corruption. We had to redesign and recode much of the base classes along with every constructor and destructor in virtually every single derived class. Every single memory allocation call had to be checked and most needed to be reimplemented. So don't tell me they provide talent that we can't find here. They're only cheaper than US engineers. As they say, you get what you pay for..

Why don't you take a look at the article I posted. Read it, try some of the links and see what you think.

Are you on a H1B visa and are trying to protect your job maybe? You've either got blinders on or you're one of those who are studying "creative" ways to screw American workers for the sake of "the shareholders". What people like you don't seem to realize is that when you toss Americans out onto the street to make room for cheap labor, you're fueling the demise of our economy. You think people in China, India, or Pakistan are going to buy American? What pray tell is there left to buy from us anyways?...

46 posted on 06/19/2002 5:16:05 AM PDT by FormerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I've dealt with H10Bs from India on many projects over many years. I have never been impressed with their skills or ability to problem solve. The typical H1-B has less skills than the average non-H1-Bs I've worked with.

It's not about skills, it's about cheap labor and using H1-Bs as a threat.

47 posted on 06/19/2002 5:28:06 AM PDT by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: FormerLurker
I feel your pain, man. I'm in Shanghai code hell right now. Were in the process of cleaning up the horrible code provided by our outsourced vendor. It would take less time to trash it all and start from scratch. Sadly, doing that would be an admission by upper-management, that the cheap foreign labor they hired didn't work out. It rarely does. This is what happens whan non-techies manage tech projects.
48 posted on 06/19/2002 5:31:44 AM PDT by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kemathen7
What you don't see is that many of these H1-B's are being hired through third parties (consulting firms). They appear to be employeed even when they aren't thus violating their terms for being here in the first place, and secondly they are actually paid far below the rate being paid by the companies they actually do work for.

I have 11 employees working for me, 2 are H1-B's 1 just got a green card after 3 years? None of them were actually employed from Septempber - January, but thay were keep on the books by thier respective consulting firms instead of going home. The pool of consultants I saw that were available about three months ago was at least 90% H1-B's. These people should have gone home a long time ago, and they are driving down chances for other qualified applicants including green card holders. They are truely indentured servants.

49 posted on 06/19/2002 5:33:45 AM PDT by Woodman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
See my response #49. There is a reason why they do not get sent home.
50 posted on 06/19/2002 5:36:23 AM PDT by Woodman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Woodman
What you don't see is that many of these H1-B's are being hired through third parties (consulting firms). They appear to be employeed even when they aren't thus violating their terms for being here in the first place, and secondly they are actually paid far below the rate being paid by the companies they actually do work for.

This is one of the dirtly little secrets of the H-1B program. A great deal of these folks are not working for companies, but are being farmed out by consulting shops for very below market rates.

51 posted on 06/19/2002 5:51:23 AM PDT by Rev DMV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: StolarStorm
When I first encountered such work, I thought that it was an abberation. Obviously it wasn't. My heart goes out to all those who have to deal with such abdominations...
52 posted on 06/19/2002 5:54:58 AM PDT by FormerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: FormerLurker
We've hired H1B's. We also pay substantially above market rate for talent -- we try to use the 20 to 1 rule to our best advantage. My guess is that the problems your client/employer were having went beyond the work they outsourced. Sounds to me like it's a badly managed project. You might be the best thing that every happened to them and they might, quite literally, be lucky to have found you.
53 posted on 06/19/2002 9:47:33 AM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: CHUCKfromCAL
HI Chuck! What line of work are you in?

*** This is NOT a solicitation :-) ***

I been bumping around ol' Silicon Valley for quite a few years.
54 posted on 06/24/2002 8:08:47 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I've got one H1-B in my group. One of my best hiring decisions. It's perhaps like any immigration -- if they are integrated into their new society and workplace, not isolated (hyphenated), then the extra drive that got them this far is one step ahead of the average, and its back to a case-by-case understanding of individual people's talents and motivation. However if work is farmed out to separate isolated groups, then unless it's real straight forward and easily driven by specification and contract, you're begging for trouble.
55 posted on 06/25/2002 6:43:09 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Hey, I owe you an email about Python and static typing but I was so swamped at the time I let it drop off the radar. Have you played with Ruby yet? The libraries are not as extensive or mature, but the object model is very elegant and well thought out.

56 posted on 06/25/2002 9:07:01 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I've just spent a few minutes looking at Ruby -- I've been quite happy with Python. I'm not comfortable with Perl like syntax, I'm not an object purist, and for my work, I need languages that are fairly mature and widely distributed (installed by default). See further How Does Ruby Compare With Python?.
57 posted on 06/25/2002 9:41:53 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
I've never been intersted in Perl. Are you turned off by Ruby's @@ prefix for class variables and such? That's not a feature I particularly like either. When it comes to syntax though I feel spoiled by Objective-C and Smalltalk -- I like the messaging syntax with named parameters, ie [foo doBarWith: blee andNotify: blah]. Python has a lot going for it. There's no Ruby equivalent for Zope, for example.
58 posted on 06/25/2002 9:48:28 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Not trying to write english to make it look like Perl. Im on an old Unix system right now and the browser is non-standard and flakey.
59 posted on 06/25/2002 9:49:37 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I never worked with Obj C nor Smalltalk -- so that might
be part of our different reactions to Ruby. My native
tongue is C. My second languages are English (half joking)
and Korn shell. I've done 100,000's of C++ lines, but
still don't feel I've mastered it. Python fits that
background well.
60 posted on 06/25/2002 10:03:29 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson