Ted Cruz Wants Minimum H-1B Wage of $110,000 (computerworld.com) 543
dcblogs writes: U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, has morphed from a vocal supporter of the H-1B program to a leading critic of it. He has done so in a new H-1B reform bill (PDF) that sets a minimum wage of $110,000 for H-1B workers. By raising the cost of temporary visa workers, Cruz is hoping to discourage their use. Cruz also wants to eliminate Optional Practical Training Program (OPT). The co-sponsor of this bill, The American Jobs First Act of 2015, is U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who called the OPT program "a backdoor method for replacing American workers."
C'mon, read the newspape (Score:2, Insightful)
That's still poverty in Silicon Valley
and make 80 hours a week cost $150K+ (Score:2)
and make 80 hours a week cost $150K+
also needs COL added as well.
I still say (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I still say (Score:4, Interesting)
I still say Ted Cruz is actually Al Lewis from The Munsters.
Yea, I noticed that too... But still, Mr. Lewis certainly wouldn't have the same politics and I think he'd be more interesting to listen too. However, who he looks like has nothing to do with his politics....
Fin Toil Hat [Re:I still say] (Score:2)
And John Kerry is Herman Munster. Illuminati at work?
Newt's "ice queen" wife doesn't directly match any of the characters, but she's gotta be a relative. (And Newt talks like a muppet, something's going on.)
Re:Fin Toil Hat [Re:I still say] (Score:2)
I still say Ted Cruz is actually Al Lewis from The Munsters.
And John Kerry is Herman Munster. Illuminati at work?
Probably [dilbert.com].
Re:I still say (Score:2)
Al Lewis ran for governor of NY as a Democrat. But Paul Ryan is most definitely the grownup Eddie Munster. Or perhaps the love child of Eddie and Jake Gyllenhaal.
Re:I still say (Score:2)
Al Lewis ran for governor of NY as a Democrat.
Actually, he was a candidate with the Green Party. [wikipedia.org]
Re:I still say (Score:3)
Re:I still say (Score:3)
Ha! (Score:2, Insightful)
Good luck with that.
No way will corporations and the lobbying of the chamber of commerce allow this intrusion of socialism to harm profits! Every .com and software company in existence will freak out and open their wallets in unifying opposition!
I guess it shows the goverment hasn't worked for it's people in the US for a long time now. This is a show for votes as no way this will pass.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Insightful)
Two people in Congress finally do something that isn't complete self-serving bullshit and the best response slashdot can come up with is a guy making fun of them.
Re:Ha! (Score:2)
Two people in Congress finally do something that isn't complete self-serving bullshit
Seriously?
Re:Ha! (Score:2)
the mouse does not want this and if you want that (Score:2)
the mouse does not want this and if you want that free VIP trip for your family we need an copyright extension and no $15 HR min wage.
Re:Ha! (Score:3)
Good luck with that.
No way will corporations and the lobbying of the chamber of commerce allow this intrusion of socialism to harm profits! Every .com and software company in existence will freak out and open their wallets in unifying opposition!
Silicon Valley tech companies that hire H-1Bs won't care much. Very few of their H-1B employees make less than $110K anyway. If the definition of "wage" includes not just base salary but also bonus (actual awarded amount) and stock (actual value, not some notional future value), then it's likely that all of their H-1B employees already meet this requirement.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Interesting)
Silicon Valley tech companies that hire H-1Bs won't care much. Very few of their H-1B employees make less than $110K anyway. If the definition of "wage" includes not just base salary but also bonus (actual awarded amount) and stock (actual value, not some notional future value), then it's likely that all of their H-1B employees already meet this requirement.
Here are the numbers for 2015 [myvisajobs.com]:
Rank H1B Visa Sponsor Number of LCA * Average Salary
1 Infosys 23,816 $76,794
2 Tata Consultancy Services 14,096 $67,673
3 Wipro 8,365 $69,936
I suppose that these workers might have received some significant additional compensation above their salary, but my guess is that the probability is pretty close to zero.
These top three companies received 46,277 visas, which is over half of the total visa issued. Their average salaries are way below $110k.
If the speculation that companies above abuse H1B visas by importing low-wage earners is true, then the $110k wage limit would eliminate those visa uses. Of course, that assumes that the changes forces companies to actually pay that much. I can easily think of many ways to circumvent the $110k limit, including paying that amount and deducting most of it back (a la indentured servitude).
But the key point is that the abuse is predicated on saving money for the ultimate users of the companies' services. Kill off the financial incentive, and the problem completely disappears.
There is actually a reasonable case for some companies to need something like an H1B. There are actually quite a few US companies that pay decent H1B wages. Instituting a minimum financial threshold allows separation of these arguably more legitimate cases from the arguably job killing cases.
13 Google 3,059 $125,596
18 Amazon 1,600 $113,163
19 Qualcomm Technologies 1,585 $111,816
21 Apple 1,464 $133,593
24 Oracle America 1,073 $119,506
40 Facebook 780 $133,535
50 Ebay 664 $121,691
55 Yahoo! 619 $132,752
59 Paypal 576 $124,616
63 VM Ware 535 $121,203
70 Cisco Systems 494 $121,899
74 Salesforce.Com 483 $124,063
96 Linkedin 382 $139,634
Re:Ha! - Federal Income tax is not paid. (Score:3, Informative)
I am a H1-B holder and as far as I know I pay tax exactly the same as everyone else.
Re:Ha! - Federal Income tax is not paid. (Score:5, Informative)
That's not what we're talking about silly H1-B.
What we're talking about, is that the jobs us Americans are working, for $75,000 would pay over $100,000. Except rather than pay what the market demands, the companies import workers on H1B visas. They claim, they can't find the talent. Utter BS, often they replaced trained with untrained workers, and have the trained workers train their replacements.
But you see, if you can hire imported workers for $60K-$70K, then you never have to pay the market value. And you can force Americans into lower pay. It's basic economics of supply and demand.
And GUESS WHY that pay average is around $60K-$70K, because that was the $110K of yesteryear. That was the amount that if the salary exceeded, they never get investigated for wage sinking. And guess what, $60K in 1990 when H1B visas went into effect, if adjusted for inflation would now be $110K. So all Ted Cruz is asking for is the originally minimum salary cap being put back in effect. All laws passed should be inflation adjusted, if so, then it would already be $110K
Re:Ha! - Federal Income tax is not paid. (Score:5, Informative)
You're figures are fine except that Hr1B visa holders DO NOT pay
federal income tax (I'm not sure of the particulars, but it's true).
So their effective salary is significantly higher than the stated values.
CAP === 'accord'
I have no idea where you get your information, but H1B visa holder are required to pay all federal, state, local taxes including FICA (Social Security) and Medicare.
The only exception I am aware of is that if you by some circumstances become a non-resident-alien of the US for part of the year (hired mid-year, or terminated mid-year), you can dual-status and only pay US taxes on your US based income and a flat 30% on non-US connected income (normally you have to pay US taxes on your worldwide income although you can claim an exemption for taxes you paid to another country).
Your confusion might be that those on OPT (practical training) temporary visas which often are used by college graduates before they get H1Bs are exempt from FICA and medicare, but are still not exempt from other state and federal income taxes. OPT used to be a max of 1 year, but now it is 2 years.
Re:Ha! (Score:2)
They could also balance this, by giving HEAFTY tax deductions for hiring US Citizens for jobs...located IN the US.
A two pronged approach to keeping US jobs in the US with US citizens working them...and ONLY after that resource is exhausted would it be necessary to have guest workers.
Do everything possible to make external to the US workers that absolute last resort.
I support this. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I support this. (Score:3, Insightful)
If a company truly needs expertise that just simply cannot be found in the US, then a six figure salary is probably a bargain. Of course, this will never pass.I can dream, though.
If it does pass, I'm leaving the country and coming back on a visa.
Re:I support this. (Score:5, Interesting)
Instead of dreaming, perhaps you need to look in the mirror and see why corporations would rather employ Joe Unknown from the other side of the world than you. If you have value, you will always get a job over someone trying the H-1B route. Presumably you have limited skills and no experience. And "web" isn't a skill, bad luck.
Tell that to the former senior engineers at Texas Instruments who were laid off while making $150k while their Indian replacements were paid $50k.
Re:I support this. (Score:3)
Tell that to the former senior engineers at Texas Instruments who were laid off while making $150k while their Indian replacements were paid $50k.
Who cares? It was a business decision by those who OWN the business - it was either a good move and it will work out well or it wasn't and the company will suffer. If someone is as good or better than you and willing to work for a third of what you do, then suck it up and YOU have to up your game.
People here worry far too much about this crap. I've been through it multiple times, and it's actually made me much more confident in my employability. Repeatedly, I've found those people who'll accept a third of the salary deliver far less than a third of the value. This isn't 2000 anymore, anyone overseas who is competent and highly talented doesn't settle for cheap wages anymore - they want the same $150k the North American was earning, and they do find it.
Re:I support this. (Score:3)
It's a business decision that is only allowed because of bribing congress. It shouldn't be an option...that's the point.
Re:I support this. (Score:3)
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/1... [cnn.com]
they were so skilled they were snaped up because they were so talented:
http://www.dallasnews.com/busi... [dallasnews.com]
Not always a good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:4, Informative)
And then those companies will realize that it's actually a bargain to pay labor costs here and get an actual working product. Every single product I've seen shipped offshore for "cheaper" labor has ultimately resulted in massive cost overruns and a product that doesn't meet expectations (at best) and frequently just doesn't work. There's a lot to be said about being able to work with your business face to face or at least in the same daylight hours when you're both awake.
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:3)
OK - you can't have it both ways! If you think the H1B guys are good enough to come here and take your jobs - then they are good enough to do the same job in whichever other country will physically house them. If it turns out that those guys are best able to do the job - then you can either pay them to come here and do it (and thereby claim their taxes and have them spend their earnings in the US economy) - or you can pay them to work someplace cheaper and spend all of their earnings and pay all of their taxes over there.
If you want less overseas workers doing your work - then you have to either get better at it - or get paid less. It's a market economy and with the Internet, you can't force tech jobs to stay in a particular physical location by passing laws that only operate in other physical locations.
So - better education or lower wages...you choose.
-- Steve
Comment removed (Score:2)
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:3)
Why not offshore US workers to somewhere cheaper? I'm surprised no one's proactively creating a tech hub in Latin America,
Let's say Alphabet, or some other large corp, are working on a new project that will take 3 years and employ 100 people. But the budget can only support 60 people over 2 years.
So they rent an office space in, say, Peru where the weather's fine 9 months of the year and language isn't a problem because everyone in California speaks Spanish anyway, right? So you're only a couple of hours time difference and everyone can fly home to visit their folks once a fortnight because airfares are cheap. We can only pay you 70% of what you'd normally get but that's okay because the cost of living is a fraction of back home and you get a cultural experience. All that tax I hear American corporations don't want to repatriate can be invested in infrastructure in the host country which benefits foreign relations.
If you're a kid fresh out of a 4 year degree and you can't find work in the Bay Area, wouldn't you jump at the chance?
If that seems far-fetched, I once met a beautiful Swedish blonde in Barcelona (but that's another story!) Her company in Sweden decided it was cheaper to relocate a couple of hundred Swedes to Spain and rent out an office than do business in their home country.
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:3)
Entire restaurants can't be outsourced, but there are companies that provide order-taking services where the person actually taking the order is sitting hundreds or thousands of miles away. They enter the order into the computer and it gets relayed back to the restaurant for local employees to make. The service costs less than an employee taking the orders because the person actually taking the orders will get shifted to a different restaurant during quiet times. There's no technical reason that this can't be done by someone overseas for even less money.
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to work in network operations for a company that did this sort of thing. Housewife in Minot, ND, sits down to her computer in the spare bedroom and logs in. A script pops up on her computer and her phone rings. "Welcome to Chikin Lickin, may I take your order?" When done, a minute or two later, the popup/phone again, "Thank you for calling Fat Burner Delux, the miracle weight loss supplement endorsed by Dr. Oz." It could be anything that someone had contracted with the company to do "virtual call center" for, ranging from very much upstanding legitimate companies and organizations, to ... not so much.
At the time (it was years ago) their phone answering people were all U.S. based, and that was one of their selling points, that they were Americans and sounded like it. I'm not sure if that's still the case or not, but there's certainly little barrier to having phone reps anywhere on Earth.
Re:Not always a good idea (Score:3)
You may call this a nitpick, but if a company moves its headquarters overseas, it *has* moved overseas.. and then (likely) still has a U.S. branch.
I simply googled "companies moving headquarters offshore". This first result:
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
mentions Burger King and Chiquita.
Dammit! (Score:5, Funny)
It's bad enough that you give my job to some foreign worker, but now your going to pay them twice as much as you were paying me?
You SUCK!
Benefits? Vacation" (Score:5, Insightful)
First "loophole" I could think of off the top of my head would be: "Sure we'll pay them $110K". Oh, those jobs include no paid health benefits, no vacation, no sick leave. That could drop the "cost" of the employee down to someone making $70K.
While that sounds bad at first, it wouldn't really be horrible, heck I might even be interested in having all the cash my employer was willing to put out and leave it up to me to spend it. For couples where the other spouse has a good deal on insurance, it might be nice to have the money rather than overlapping policies.
Re:Benefits? Vacation" (Score:3)
>For couples where the other spouse has a good deal on insurance, it might be nice to have the money rather than overlapping policies.
So ask for it. My wife has negotiated higher wages because she doesn't need to use her companies' health insurance.
Re:Benefits? Vacation" (Score:3)
Re:Benefits? Vacation" (Score:3)
It not only sounds bad, it sounds illegal. H1B workers must, by law, be paid the same as a resident worker, and get the same benefits.
Which raises a question: I'm not sure if it is legal to pay a H1B worker *more* than a normal worker. So, if you're forced to pay a H1B worker $110K, and your normal staff currently happens to earn $95K, do you (a) raise your salaries to match, or (b) tick off your current staff so they quit?
Re:Benefits? Vacation" (Score:4, Interesting)
Jobs will be offshored (Score:3)
Well-intentioned things like this and (some) tariffs sound like a good idea but have a tendency to not work out as intended. I wish there was an easy solution to this erosion of jobs/income.
Re:Jobs will be offshored (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Jobs will be offshored (Score:3)
You still lose anyway as these shops won't hire you regardless. Nothing to loose as appeasement won't win with corporations
Re:Jobs will be offshored (Score:2)
I tend to agree in theory BUT the big corps will just take the H1B and a bunch of other jobs and move them elsewhere.
The quota would still be filled at the higher wage, but the H1-Bs would be higher quality and possess skills for positions that are actually difficult to fill, as opposed to just cutting labor costs. So it's a net benefit to the nation.
As for $110k still being too little for Silicon Valley et al.... whatever. It's a free country. Move. There are plenty of tech employers that exist in places where compensation is aligned better with costs. Your poverty is self-inflicted. Enjoy.
Re:Jobs will be offshored (Score:2)
Close.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Add $80,000 to that number for any H1B in California or New York City.
Honestly, H1B is NOT for cheap labor, it 's for highly skilled professionals that you cant find anywhere else. Force the scumbag CEO's to pay for them.
Re:Close.... (Score:5, Insightful)
What it is for and how it is used are two very different things.
Ted Cruz said it... (Score:2)
Getting there (Score:2)
A nice step (Score:3)
I just want a company officer to sign off, under penalty of perjury, on the supposed prevailing pay for the position they are seeking to fill. Right now the company gets to essentially make up a number, which no one checks and carries no penalty if anyone were to find out that they massively lowballed it. Put a company officer on the hook for it and suddenly those wages are going to jump up to a competitive level. Putting an artificial floor on the pay for visa holders is a nicely simple step that is hard to evade, but I'd really rather we just force the companies to pay the real wage for the job or have someone high ranking head to jail. There might genuinely be a job at a lower pay level that we simply can't get enough qualified Americans to fill. I don't know what it might be, but I don't want to close the door, I just want to cut back on the abuses.
wow, look at that! (Score:2)
The stopped clock is right on something.
I thought Cruz was a libertarian? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I thought Cruz was a libertarian? (Score:3)
Re:I thought Cruz was a libertarian? (Score:2)
He's not a libertarian.
But to people who like to hate Libertarians, it is useful to call him one, then point out that he is an idiot (which he is), and therefore all libertarians are stupid. Solid logic.
There are lots of qualified people in the US (Score:2)
On the other end of the age spectrum, I have met many a Ph. D. s in fields that had a glut of people, e.g. medical sciences or in fields that do not have a high demand, Philosophy, Mathematics, Literature, or Oceanography. Most of these former students had unrealistic expectations of job prospects or believed that somehow they would be the one to overcome the odds and land a professorship. After about a two year job search, most come to the realization that they should have became a "short order chef: which has better career prospects. Being broke and destitute, they are looking to retool to become a programmer or bank administrator or "tech writer" and have the mental aptitude to learn what is necessary.
Better yet... (Score:2)
Better yet, instead of an artificial minimum wage, have them pay the wages of the displaced worker, PLUS the cost it would take to retrain the displaced worker PLUS the cost of vetting H-1B workers by the government.
Then, a business can determine if there truly are no qualified works, is it in their best interest to import labor or train their existing labor.
Of course businesses, particularly IT ones, will complain that if they train or retrain workers, the workers will just leave and they will still be out the money. The answer to that is simple -- quit treating your workers like shit!
Didn't Trump say... (Score:2, Funny)
Didn't Trump say he was going to fire any CEO of a company that hires H1-B workers... maybe not... but sounds like something he'd say...
Minimum Wage Not as Important as Layoff Provision (Score:5, Interesting)
The bill also calls for:
that within 730 daysâ"two yearsâ"of âoean employee strike, an employer lockout, layoffs, furloughs, or other types of involuntary employee terminations other than for-cause dismissals,â a company cannot bring aboard any H-1B labor
I think this is an even bigger deal than the $110k provision.
Prefer a tax (Score:2)
I would prefer a substantial Federal tax (perhaps 25% of the reported W-2 income?) paid by the H-1B employer and removal of H-1B caps.
Retain the prevailing wage requirement, but when computing general prevailing wages, include the H-1B tax the employers pay in the prevailing wage calculation for H-1B workers in general (but not in the wage of the specific H-1B position that is being evaluated).
Just for show, also retain the 'must try to hire an American first' requirement - but that's really a joke as we all know the 'on paper' qualifications of a developer mean almost nothing as some of the worst performers have some of the best looking resumes so enforcement is impossible without hamstringing employers and American companies.
The Federal government would first use the taxes so raised to sharpen enforcement of the provisions of the H-1B program (esp. as it relates to 'prevailing wage'), the rest could go into the Social Security Trust Fund to prop that up.
This would go a long way towards making sure that the employers actually NEED to hire foreign workers and make it much harder to game 'prevailing wage' by making the out of pocket cost to the employer significantly higher for H-1B workers.
In addition, by including the employer tax when computing prevailing wage and then requiring that the next H-1B worker get that higher wage it creates a snowball effect that discourages frivolous use of H-1Bs even more. One effect would be to drive the 'prevailing wage' for H-1B computations higher and higher as a larger percentage of comparable positions were filled by H-1B holders. Since the employer actually has to pay the H-1B holder the 'adjusted' prevailing wage, they would be making more than American workers overall which would make the H-1B option even less attractive AND would cause American workers to demand raises if they were, in fact, contributing as much. Rinse and repeat. To avoid a runaway situation which could have bad consequences (such as American workers abandoning the field entirely), there would probably need to be some sort of brake on this effect such as capping the 'prevailing wage adjustment' to 25% of the base prevailing wage.
What's His Game? (Score:2)
Freedom is still the best answer (Score:2)
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:3, Interesting)
Sometimes things change.
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:2)
Sometimes things change.
Change to what???
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:2)
It sounds to me like the Distinguished Gentleman from Texas should continue to serve as a Senator, where as an idea-man his ideas can be presented and debated, and the good ones considered for real implementation, and where bad ones could be decided against.
Comment removed (Score:2)
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:3)
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:5, Insightful)
Ted Cruz used to be the Republican candidate who I considered the most arrogant, and most annoying to listen to (he started running for president years ago!). Sometimes things change.
No, I still think Cruz is annoying, arrogant, etc. etc... but on this one particular issue he is right and has put forward a good proposal.
We really need to get past partisan politics where whole issues get misappropriated by political parties. People are not stereotypes and ideas should matter more than the color of their party.
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:5, Funny)
"Sometimes things change."
Yes, but not politicians.
Sure they do. They flip-flop all the time!
Re:Cruz can't be trusted (Score:3)
So since he's not arrogant and annoying anymore, are you considering him?
He's still arrogant and annoying. I was trying to point out that other candidates have come along who are more annoying. As for considering him, I've already resigned myself to the fact that we're going to have a lousy president next term, and I'm glad that the US system has shown itself resilient enough to survive that.
He's given some pretty good defenses of the 1st amendment.
It's really sad that's even needed.
That he may be (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't like Ted Cruz. I don't like that he has double-standards. I think he's a hypocrite. And I don't like the platform he has chosen to run on.
But a good idea is a good idea. And when someone we disagree with shares a good idea, we should unite behind it, rather than censor it because of its source. If we don't, we just divide this nation further.
Re:That he may be (Score:5, Insightful)
But a good idea is a good idea.
It's not though. That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another. In my area/industry that's actually really low, but there are a lot of H1Bs here. Additionally, salaries change over time, do we need a federal fiat every time? Will we have to fight for "minimum indentured servant wage increase" every N years?
H1Bs should stop being granted. Offer green cards to present holders, but no more new ones. Either they come in with a green card and you take the risk that they leave or suck, or they don't come in.
Re:That he may be (Score:5, Insightful)
The H-1B program definitely needs to be massively overhauled. I wouldn't say it needs to be permanent residency, but it certainly needs to entitle the holder to freely move to another job, just like any other worker. The companies also need to be made to pay enough in fees for sponsoring it that they won't be making money - let's say, $100k per year of the visa. There also shouldn't be any rebates if the worker quits, so there's incentive to pay the person well and treat them well. For people who really represent such critical skills that there really is no American available to do the job, that shouldn't be an issue at all.
Re:That he may be (Score:4, Interesting)
I aggree with this. The main problem is that H1B employees are fairly "trapped" in their job. That creates an artificial pool of employees that are likely not to leave the company which drives bargaining power down for the workers.
Also you could tie future H1B visa for a company to the number of retained H1B.
Re:That he may be (Score:3)
Re:That he may be (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That he may be (Score:3)
The H-1B abuse that's been in the news lately is by Indian tech outsourcing firms, and it has nothing to do with low wage H-1B workers. These firms use H-1B visas to bring temporary workers to the US for the explicit purpose of documenting the jobs currently being done by US workers. Then most of the US workers are fired and replaced with offshore workers a prevailing Indian rates. This should be flat-out illegal. Having to pay these guys $100K wouldn't stop this abuse, because they're only in place for a few months at most, and the savings from offshoring dwarf the expense. I'll leave my rant about how badly offshore workers duplicate the work of the US workers they replaced - I've made that here before.
Re:That he may be (Score:3, Informative)
The H-1B program definitely needs to be massively overhauled. I wouldn't say it needs to be permanent residency, but it certainly needs to entitle the holder to freely move to another job, just like any other worker.
What do you mean? H1B workers are perfectly capable of getting another job... they just have to get their new employer to file a petition for a new H1B visa... which includes (I'm sure this won't scare off any hiring managers):
Initiating a new H1B visa application including
Two or three most recent pay stubs. (Not required if the existing H-1B was never used and the transfer is applied from outside the U.S.)
Copy of your most recent H1-B approval notice, Form I-797[1]
Copy of all pages of your passport[2] (including blank ones), which is valid for your entire requested period of stay in the U.S.
Photocopy of Form I-94[3]. Do NOT send the original. You are not required to send the original. If you sent the original by mistake, and if you need it back, you can file form G-884 with USCIS. G-884 is not available online. You have to request it by mail.
More details[4].
Copy of the most current visa stamp[5]. Visa stamp does not have to be unexpired.
Latest resume.
Copy of social security card[6].
All previous approval notices.
Copy of all degrees, diplomas, transcripts and mark sheets.
Copy of work experience letters, offer letters and relieving letters.
W-2's and tax returns, if applicable.
-http://www.immihelp.com/visas/h1b/h1-transfer.html
Best part is that you can start your new job right away... only drawback being that if the application gets rejected by the government then you need to immediately stop working and leave the country... but no biggie. Easy right!
Re:That he may be (Score:3, Interesting)
This makes it an imperfect idea, perhaps... but not a bad one.
The main argument against H-1B visas (at least the most vocal argument) is that big corps are using cheap foreign labor to cut costs, at the expense of American workers. Do you disagree?
Putting a high threshold on entry is an elegant solution. Much more creative and clever than the usual thinking present in Washington. Maybe the exact numbers proposed are imperfect. Those can be fiddled with easily enough. But the broad concept of a minimum H-1B wage allows the original spirit of the H1B program to soldier forth -bringing the best and the brightest from around the world to help the USA- while reducing the abuse as laid out in the above paragraph.
Re:That he may be (Score:5, Interesting)
The main argument against H-1B visas (at least the most vocal argument) is that big corps are using cheap foreign labor to cut costs, at the expense of American workers. Do you disagree?
It is one strong argument citing abuse. Other good arguments are: second class (non)citizens, lack of freedom to negotiate salaries, lack of freedom to leave bad employers, not to mention idealistic failure.
Putting a high threshold on entry is an elegant solution.
It is not high for say: engineering R&D, it's quite low, entry level in some fields. It may be high for IT... hard for me to say. However it WILL sound high to a lot of voting americans, particularly the ones voting republican. It is a political stunt. Divide your enemies against each other, most americans can't differentiate between "wealthier middle class" and "filthy rich". They do this all the time in union areas to try to deflate strikes.
bringing the best and the brightest from around the world to help the USA-
Or, we give qualified candidate first dibs at green cards, and allow them to negotiate with their own employer. Some might believe this is more in the spirit of "free market" than a federal fiat is. Except we don't like free markets when they work against the rich guy.
Re:That he may be (Score:2)
It does not matter if it is low because it can always be higher...That it may be high in some areas is not really an issue either. You should only be hiring someone for that position if you cannot find local talent for it, by law, therefore the pay should be hiring than normal.
Re:That he may be (Score:3)
That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another.
This.
H1-B jobs are supposed to be paid at the prevailing wage for the position and the industry it's in. We can be cynical about how some employers scoff at this and misuse H1-Bs, but the solution is to enforce the existing law, not break it with an unworkable across-the-board salary threshold.
Re:That he may be (Score:3, Interesting)
That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another.
This.
H1-B jobs are supposed to be paid at the prevailing wage for the position and the industry it's in. We can be cynical about how some employers scoff at this and misuse H1-Bs, but the solution is to enforce the existing law, not break it with an unworkable across-the-board salary threshold.
The prevailing wage is not good enough because it can be gamed and also because foreign workers can be treated more harshly because they can't quit. A better solution would be pay the h1b holder the prevailing wage but then pay an additional 50% tax on their salary on top. I wouldn't be opposed to even a 100% tax. That money should then be donated to organizations that are able to train americans to do whatever job that apparently has no local talent (colleges, trade schools, etc.. depending on what industry the h1b1 is being granted in).
Re:That he may be (Score:4, Interesting)
That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another.
This.
H1-B jobs are supposed to be paid at the prevailing wage for the position and the industry it's in. We can be cynical about how some employers scoff at this and misuse H1-Bs, but the solution is to enforce the existing law, not break it with an unworkable across-the-board salary threshold.
You need both: a requirement to pay at least the prevailing wage and a requirement to pay at least a fixed wage.
Prevailing wage should generally be best but, without a hard number, it is too easy to game. That is what the fixed minimum would come in. No matter how you classify a position to try to work around the prevailing wage requirement, you can't pay less than the fixed minimum.
Easy way to handle locality use GS Pay Scale (Score:2)
Just use the top rate for technical people in the federal government. GS 13 Step 10. That way locality and cost of living increases are built in.
http://www.federaljobs.net/pay... [federaljobs.net]
Re:Easy way to handle locality use GS Pay Scale (Score:2)
Except that many/most technical people I know won't work for the federal government on a bet because the wages are too low. The government is AN employer, and they pay what they pay.
Re:Easy way to handle locality use GS Pay Scale (Score:3)
Re:That he may be (Score:3)
Re:That he may be (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That he may be (Score:5, Informative)
Umm you do realize that if H1-Bs are paid more than American workers it would be cheaper to employ Americans, right?
Re:That he may be (Score:3)
Re:Extend Sarbanes Oxley (Score:2)
Most H1B jobs are in computer programming and hardware design; no PII is involved. Your proposal would have essentially zero effect.
Re:Republicans... (Score:2)
Yea, and kill half of the population of the USA, yea that's going to help... Real bright idea there AC..
Re:Republicans... (Score:2)
On the upside, it would make it easier to get a parking place.
Re:Yeah right (Score:2)
Slashdot Economics 101: when in doubt, just throw up some horseshit.
That only assumes that the milk company has perfect pricing power. It does not. Since there is more than one milk company, there is a limit to how high the price can be raised. Since a rise in the minimum wage does not immediately raise the wages of ALL non-minimum wage workers, the effect of raising the minimum wage is not the same as saying "Every dollar is now worth TWO dollars". Rising wages have a minimal effect on inflation. For example, it's been shown that doubling the minimum wage for fast food workers would add about $0.04 to the price of a Big Mac.
Re:nothing but pandering & election noise (Score:2)
dangerously close to handing the next presidency over to Bernie
Bernie Sanders wants to raise wages of H-1B workers [computerworld.com] - Nov 25, 2015
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants to reform the H-1B program, in part, by "substantially" raising prevailing wages.
Re:Another dumbfuck politician. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just get everyone to agree on the precise boundary of what "free trade" is. Can you buy animals? Can you buy water rights? Can you own ideas? Writing? People? What about land? What if I just have enough guns?
Your notions of property rights might seem obvious to you, but not everyone agrees with you. We, as a community, must come to a consensus. One man's free trade is another man's anarchy, and another's totalitarianism. Can't tell if I'm responding to sarcasm or not.
Re:Another dumbfuck politician. (Score:3)
Just get everyone to agree on the precise boundary of what "free trade" is. Can you buy animals? Can you buy water rights? Can you own ideas? Writing? People? What about land? What if I just have enough guns?
Your notions of property rights might seem obvious to you, but not everyone agrees with you. We, as a community, must come to a consensus. One man's free trade is another man's anarchy, and another's totalitarianism.
^ Why did you post AC? That is spot on the money.
Re:R's, WTF (Score:2)
Well, to be fair, neither Cruz or Trump are "establishment" republicans. In fact, most of the top prospective nominees on the republican side are pretty much outsider, non-establishment types. If you are an establishment republican, you are running no higher than about 5th in the polls... In my opinion, this fact is way over looked by most of the media and the significance of this way under played.
However, it is clear that candidates like Trump, Carson and Cruz are the ones with the best chance for the nomination which will make this presidential cycle very interesting indeed given the democrat's almost certainly nominating Hillary. But I'm getting the impression that what's really going to happen is that Trump will have a LOT of support going into the convention, but it will not be the majority by a long shot. There will be a brokered deal which will put someone a bit more establishment in the race than Trump. At that point, everything will hinge on what Trump does. If he goes independent, Hillary wins comfortably. If Trump backs down and supports the nominee, Hillary won't know what hit her in the electoral college... On the other hand, if Trump manages to broker a deal and becomes the nominee, Hillary will be behind most of the way but have a good chance if they come up with a good October surprise..
So what we will likely have is a race between the quintessential "Establishment" candidate on the left with Hillary and a anti-establishment like candidate on the right. This in a time where the majority is disapproving of the current establishment administration. Remember, there is a yearning in the public towards the non-establishment types these days, and that will draw voters away from what will clearly be the establishment candidate Hillary.