Posted on 11/13/2002 10:28:24 AM PST by dark_lord
Yet readers of the articles proclaiming a shortage would be perplexed if they also knew that Microsoft only hires 2% of its applicants for software positions, and that this rate is typical in the industry. Software employers, large or small, across the nation, concede that they receive huge numbers of re'sume's but reject most of them without even an interview. One does not have to be a ``techie'' to see the contradiction here. A 2% hiring rate might be unremarkable in other fields, but not in one in which there is supposed to be a ``desperate'' labor shortage. If employers were that desperate, they would certainly not be hiring just a minuscule fraction of their job applicants.
Here is a table showing the actual number of job applicants hired for a variety of companies:
American Management Systems | 2% |
Broderbund Software | 1% |
Cisco | 5% |
|
|
Cohesive | 2% |
Datascan | 5% |
Deltanet | 4% |
ECbridges | 2% |
Flashpoint Technology | 2 to 5% |
R.D. Raab | 1% |
|
|
H.L. Yoh | 4% |
Inktomi | less than 5% |
Microsoft | 2% |
Net Perceptions | 2% |
New England firm | 1% |
Qualcomm | 4.5% |
|
|
Radiant Systems | under 1% |
Red Hat Linux | under 1% |
Tangis | under 1% |
In other words, there is no shortage of ``bodies,'' i.e. there is no shortage of experienced computer programmers. The problem is that employers are not willing to hire them. Employers are only willing to hire from three narrow categories of programmers:
* New or recent (within a few years of graduation) college graduates, who have cheaper salaries. Note, though, that even among new computer science graduates, fewer than half are hired as programmers.
* Foreign nationals on work visas, who have cheaper salaries.
* A relatively small number of experiencedprogrammers who have background in certain highly-specialized software technologies.
Dr. Matloff says: "Hiring managers have often complained to me that their firm's Human Resources Dept. screens out resume's of applicants who the managers feel qualified. HR apparently decides to screen out the applicants who are too expensive or too old - and then complains that there is a ``shortage'' of applicants...There does seem to be coordination among the HR departments of the various firms. The HR departments of the major firms in Silicon Valley hold monthly meetings, at which the firms exchange information with each other on policy, salaries and so on. (Personal communication from Paul Donnelly, IEEE-USA, June 30, 2000.)...All the firms hire an extremely low percentage of their programming applicants, due to the fact that all the firms overstate job requirements...Almost all firms aim for applicants having three to seven years (or two to eight) of experience."
He says: "It seems safe to say that experience may not be the most valued commodity, according to a survey of 200 IT managers nationwide conducted by InformationWeek Research in May. Though age wasn't specified in the question, only 2% of the managers said they would most likely hire a worker with 10 or more years' experience. Almost half-46%-preferred to hire a worker with four to 10 years' experience, while 26% said they would hire a worker with less than three years' experience, and another 26% wanted an entry-level worker or recent college graduate."
This says it all.
When people with the proper education, skills, and experience are not even called into an interview, when that employer proceeds to recruit junior H1-B personnel, when those employers state that a shortage exist where it doesn't, I'd there is a SERIOUS problem with this. It is NOT just me saying this, it is a vast range of people saying it.
Take your insults elsewhere, I'm TYRING to have a reasonable conversation here and your jag-off routine isn't cutting it.
If you want to claim to be a QA engineer or manager, you should expect to be held accountable for your statements. The statements that you made on that other thread indicated to me that you were no such thing. You try to persuade others with the argument that there are few qualified applicants, as if you actually know that to be true. How could you know that to be true if you yourself are not qualified to make that determination?
It most certainly does.
I'd SAY there is a SERIOUS problem with this..
thanks for the post.
<SARCASM>
Perfect idea if combined with complete abolishment of welfare, food stamps, unemployment benefits etc ... Borders should be completely open so Americans will have to learn to became competitive with Chinese, Indians while the business can relocate across the world. And who knows, maybe some more indolent people will move out of the country (to Europe or Canada for example).
What the heck? Let market governs EVERYTHING! Let auctions replace the silly and wasteful elections - the most successful are the most qualified to rule. Army, police should be privatised and let them be based on profit. Justice system can be made much more efficient if based on a fee system - O.J.s of this world instead of paying lawyers will be able to purchase the favorable sentence without all the confussion. Roads should have toll-houses. Etc, etc ... </SARCASM>
This is the ad:
MORTGAGE - Expanding co. in Silver Spg. looking for H-1B visa holders. Will sponsor new candidates or continue to sponsor from other financial fields, strong English skills a must. Spanish or Portuguese a plus.
Isn't this against the law to specifically seek out foreign workers instead of American citizens? Anybody, any thoughts on the legality of this? I find it hard to believe in the hot Washington dc real estate market that they cannot find Americans to fill this job. It appears that they are not advertising to fill a specific job since the ad is so vague, it seems more likely that they are seeking out H-1B's specifically. Some type of scam, maybe? Scam Immigration lawyers?
|
How to Underpay H-1B WorkersOne of the canards H-1B supporters use is the claim that H-1B is not used to depress wages because the law requires employers to pay the prevailing wage. Yet, whenever the government releases salary figures for H-1B programmers they are significantly less then what Americans make. The following is a real example of how the system can be manipulated to pay H-1B workers significantly less than Americans. BackgroundIn 2001 Bank of America (BofA) in Charlotte, NC "outsourced" its Human Resources (HR) functions to a company called Exult. As part of the arrangement, the Bank of America employees supporting these functions were made Exult employees. The affected employees had very specialized skills in that they worked with PeopleSoft and Oracle. The lowest advertise salary we found in the Charlotte for PeopleSoft programmers was $65,000 and the highest was $115,000. This range is consistent with the reported salaries ($70,000-$90,000) of the BofA/Exult employees who lost their jobs. The MethodCompanies who wish to import H-1B workers are required to file a Labor Condition Application (LCA) with the Department of Labor showing that they are, in fact, paying the H-1B workers according to the law. Keep in mind is that the law only allows the Department of Labor to ensure that the LCA form is filled out correctly. The Department of Labor does not validate the prevailing wage. Attached below is an LCA filed by HCL for some of the H-1B replacements at BofA/Exult. The salary for the H-1B workers is $39,184, about half of what the people they replaced made. So how can HCL claim they are paying the prevailing wage? The first step used here in the wage depression process is to call the H-1B workers generic "systems analysts". So instead of using the The LCA says that the employer used OES (The Bureau of Labor Statistics "Occupational Employment Survey") to get the prevailing wage. OES put the mean salary for "systems analysts" in Charlotte, NC at $60,150, a figure significantly greater than what the H-1B workers were The Department of Labor provides an additional service to assist employers to depress wages in their on-line LCA system. There, employers can get a prevailing wage for Level 1 ("Beginning level employees") workers and Level 2 ("Fully competent employees") workers, which in this example are $41,246 and $69,618 respectively. So now the employer claims the H-1B workers are "Beginning level employees" and uses the lower wage as the prevailing wage. Even if the law is not being violated, note that HCL is paying these supposedly "highly-skilled" and "best and brightest" employees the lowest wage it can possibly get away with, right down to the last dollar. |
Ok, let's check it out..
Somebody already provided a link to zazona's page. The DB has TONS of apparent duplicates.
It has been demonstrated on that thread that it is common for companies to submit multiple applications with the same job title and start date. There are NOT necessarily any duplicates, no matter what you attempt to say to the contrary.
These duplicates COULD be from the original DOL database, they COULD be from whatever procedure zazona is using to make the copy, or the COULD be from the procedure they're using to grab the data for user queries.
An exact copy is a FILE copy, not a database record copy. You DO know the difference don't you? If there were query errors, they'd be consistant across queries which use the same search criteria. Again, this is not the case. Of course, you should know that too.
If you don't know that then it's YOU that is LIEING about your supposed experience.
Do you know what the acronyms UT, IT, and ST signify? What about regression testing, what is that?
Any query of this database will show these duplicates and further investigation will show that there's no procedural reason for these (ie you'll see multiple identical applications for 30 H1Bs from 1 company and another company with a single application for 100, clearly demonstrating that 30 is not the single application cap).
Why doesn't someone ask the DOL what it means? It IS their data in case you forgot that simple fact.
You're "explanations" ran the gamut from terrorism to accusing me of being a shill.
No, I said that fraud is rampant in the immigration system, as that is what the GAO had found. It is the GAO that said that this leaves the door open to terrorism. I simply explained that "extra" work visas could be sold on the blackmarket. ONE of the possibilities is that a terrorist COULD easily purchase one of these visas. I didn't say that "terrorism" is the CAUSE of these so-called duplicate records, which is what you consistently insist that I said.
My explanation is simple: the DB sucks, I place no blame but I do say the company PRESENTING the data bears responsibility for explaining the problems to those querying it.
You CONSISTENTLY attempt to discredit the data. That is why I suspect your motives here are far removed from an innocent curiosity or sincere interest in the validity of the data. Your ONLY motive appears to be to discredit the information in ANY manner possible.
The owners of this site have requested people not drag arguments from one thread to the other, they've asked people to be respectful and not start flame wars.
I'm simply not buying your qualifications as a QA engineer. Hey, maybe you ARE a manager, as I HAVE seen a few of them that shouldn't have had the position they did. There are also administrative positions that require little or no knowledge technically, but rarely is that true in QA. I'm not trying to start a war, I'm simply stating my observations. If you simply gave your opinion, perhaps I'd give you a pass on your prior assertions. BUT, you are indicating to all of us that you are involved in QA. What IS it exactly that you test?
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.