
US immigration didn't allow us to build a team here, so we built one in Colombia - torrenegra
http://blog.bunnyinc.com/us-immigration-policy-sucks-for-startups/
======
bitJericho
Why did the author have to hire someone abroad to come in? We have so much
talent sitting right here in the US.

For example, I live in a small town with 3 high end customer service call
centers that I know about (there's probably more I don't), and the rates they
pay are well below national average because the cost of living is low here. In
my area one could build a team of world-class customer service reps in a
matter of weeks, pay them better than any place in the area, and have an
experienced and high quality staff immediately available when more staff are
needed.

Of course I'm not knocking Santiago; having the ability and the qualities
necessary to build a quality customer service team is extremely valuable no
matter where you are.

~~~
icambron
> Why did the author have to hire someone abroad to come in? We have so much
> talent sitting right here in the US.

 _Have to_ is the wrong way to look at it. He hired this person because he
thought he would be the best at the job. Why should he have to prefer the
talent in the US?

~~~
thetrb
Isn't that what US labor and immigration laws are intended for? To promote
hiring US citizens or legal residents?

~~~
CodeMage
No. The US labor and immigration laws are intended to make sure immigrant
labor doesn't pose an unfair competition to US labor. In theory, this should
protect both immigrants (from being exploited) and US citizens (from unfair
competition).

Unfortunately, this doesn't work as well in practice: the fact that the H-1B
is completely tied to a particular employer makes it the modern equivalent of
indentured servitude and the H-4 makes things worse by not allowing your
family members to work.

~~~
pedrosorio
[http://www.immihelp.com/visas/h1b/h1-transfer.html](http://www.immihelp.com/visas/h1b/h1-transfer.html)

~~~
CodeMage
Here's an excerpt from your link:

 _Therefore, when people say "H1 transfer", it is actually just a new H-1B
petition, all over again, without the restriction of the H-1B cap._

So the only thing this allows you is to skip the cap. Every other bit of
bureaucracy is still there.

~~~
pedrosorio
You forgot to mention the excerpts that describe how the previous employer
doesn't have to intervene in any way and that the employee may start working
for the new employer as soon as they get the receipt notice.

Granted there is some bureaucracy (which is largely handled by lawyers hired
by the new employer, as it should be), and as with any bureaucratic system
there is always a (low) probability of (unwarranted) rejection.

The H-1B is a far cry from "the modern equivalent of indentured servitude". I
wonder how many "free men" wouldn't love to be "modern indentured servants"
while getting paid 6 figures (and unlike the 18th century version, without
being subject to physical punishment and having the opportunity to leave
whenever they desire).

I agree wholeheartedly with your statement about the H-4, that's just sad.

------
fchollet
For the record, the demonstrated effect of US tech workers visa caps is less
jobs _for US-born workers_ too (as the economy is artificially slowed down as
a whole).

For instance it is estimated that during the recession over 200,000 jobs _for
US-born workers_ weren't created due to immigration policy restrictions:
[http://www.renewoureconomy.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/06/pn...](http://www.renewoureconomy.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/06/pnae_h1b.pdf)

~~~
drivingmenuts
Sounds to me like Businesses are spitefully avoiding creating jobs that they
can't give to imported labor. I get that H1Bs are cheaper, and now, you can
bring them and their wives over, but why not just go there and save the rest
of us having listen to you whine about not being able to find people, when
it's really about finding people at sub-market prices?

~~~
arjn
Thats funny. I'm an H1B and am definitely not cheaper than my US counterparts.
So don't generalize.

~~~
protomyth
Your case shouldn't be generalized either. Strangely, I'm getting a lot of
404's when trying to find the actual stats on the Dept of Labor website.

~~~
enraged_camel
The parent is not generalizing. The first step of the application process, not
just for H1B but for all employment-based visas (including green card), is to
submit a ton of evidence to the Department of Labor that proves that you are
being paid at least the median salary for your position in the region you are
employed in. You can read more about that here (second paragraph):
[http://www.dol.gov/whd/immigration/h1b.htm](http://www.dol.gov/whd/immigration/h1b.htm)

Do some employers game this system? Sure. But doing so is risky and repeat
offenders can get blacklisted by the USCIS.

~~~
protomyth
My own experience is that H1-Bs were cheap consultant fodder, but that was
from the late 90's. Hire a bunch of folks from India under H-1B, place them at
companies, and pay them lower (non-consultant wages, poor benefits), then
collect the difference the higher bill rate. I can name a couple of companies
in the Twin Cities that pulled that stunt. The above is my generalization of
my experience as the GP and GGP did.

I saw that page, but I was looking for the actual wage stats and kept running
into 404s (including one from that page).

~~~
enraged_camel
Like I said, the system can be gamed. But that's not an argument against
hiring foreign workers. It's an argument for improving the system to make it
more robust.

~~~
protomyth
No, its not an argument against hiring foreign workers. It is an argument that
the current system is broken. I would prefer they do a very ungovernment thing
and scrap it then replace it (without a gap / carrying over the workers) with
something rethought.

I would particularly be happier with something based on automatic worker visas
for graduates of US universities, applying the permit to the spouse also, and
no specific company assignment. This sponsored stuff keeps everyones wages
down by not providing H-1B movement.

------
vitd
I find this logic bizarre: "The US should also learn a lesson here. Because of
the current, non-sensical immigration laws, Americans lost sixteen jobs."

I don't see the connection. You wanted to hire someone on a visa - not a US
citizen. You couldn't, so instead of looking for one person within the country
(possibly somewhere cheaper than where your business is), you decided to hire
him and 15 other non-citizens.

I don't think that has anything to do with immigration law being messed up.
That has to do with _you_ making a decision to hire 16 people in another
country.

That's not a bad thing, but it's just not what you're claiming it is.

~~~
untog
_You wanted to hire someone on a visa - not a US citizen._

US citizen or not, they'll be paying US tax. As it is, the country has lost
out on potential tax income from those employees.

~~~
wvenable
Your point is correct. But hiring a US citizen would be better for the country
because not only would there be the potential tax income but the savings from
lower unemployment.

~~~
untog
How many talented developers are out of work in the US right now? Particularly
in somewhere like the Bay area, where this startup would be based.

~~~
gohrt
> How many talented developers are out of work in the US right now?
> Particularly in somewhere like the Bay area,

0, which is why salaries and rents are incredibly high.

------
zeidrich
This person seems like they would have been the right person for this job.

Apart from the people complaining about the restrictions of H-1B's their guy
was willing to accede to those restrictions.

These regulations are designed to let people like this guy come work in these
situations.

The issue was that too many requests were filed so an unfair system (lottery)
was used to determine who would even be evaluated. Because of this high volume
of requests, two things happen. First of all, you can't properly verify if the
requests are legitimate (a specialized worker, unrivaled in this position) or
illegitimate (a cheaper worker, willing to put up with under-market conditions
for the benefit of leaving a worse foreign situation). Secondly, when the
validity of a request isn't checked thoroughly, it's too easy to abuse and the
number of illegitimate requests go up, making it take even more resources to
get through requests.

It sucks. The better solution is to make fair rules, and have the resources to
apply them fairly. Unfortunately, hiring more government workers to be able to
better process and make sure good foreign workers don't get left out of the
country is not a politically safe move to make, while keeping them foreigners
from stealing American jobs is more appealing to a public worried about
unemployment. Trying to convince them that being able to hire a guy from out
of the country means that more jobs will open up is not a straightforward
thing to do.

~~~
glenra
> _The better solution is to make fair rules, and have the resources to apply
> them fairly._

No, the better solution is to just open the borders and let everybody in who
wants to work. Bigotry against foreigners is no less ugly than bigotry against
any other arbitrary group. Letting in people who are willing to work cheaply
isn't "illegitimate" or "abuse", it benefits everyone involved.

Here's a good short video on "anti-foreign bias":
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXMnAPGY1uE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXMnAPGY1uE)

------
justizin
This foolish reasoning leans pretty strongly on the logical fallacy that it is
in the best interest of everyone for all new businesses to be founded in the
US, when in fact, it is in the best interest of everyone for new businesses to
be founded all over the world, creating jobs everywhere.

This, in fact, has created the immigration supply and demand problem that the
OP finds frustrating.

Build your business in columbia. Sell things over the internet or whatever
your crashed ass website does, and live a happy life.

stop whining.

~~~
taylorwc
Your argument is absolutely true in the long run, from a global perspective.
But can you really argue that the country in which a business is founded
wouldn't benefit more than a neighboring country?

~~~
justizin
yes, i can. let's take columbia for an example. the united states spends
(obviously wastes) billions of dollars fighting cocaine production there. it
may actually be a net win to fucking _send_ entrepreneurs there to give
creative-minded young folks an alternative to spending their creativity
evading capture.

~~~
taylorwc
Fair enough for an example that is fighting an illegal activity whose origins
are outside of the country, but that seems like a fringe scenario, albeit a
huge market. In the context of a business start, it is almost always more
beneficial to a local/regional/national economy to have it be domestic.

------
McDiesel
Why does it matter anymore? Even most undocumented foreigners pay taxes... as
long as you pay taxes, why does it matter?

Why does imperialism/nationalism still exist? Why does it matter where you
came out of a vagina - why should that determine your opportunities (through
limiting where you can work)?

In the modern world, we'd be better off considering everyone citizens of the
world and dropping the attitude we have about our borders.

~~~
geebee
I have a hard time with this. Consider the case of New Zealand. It has a
population of about 4.5 million, and a land area considerably larger than
California. Like the US, it is largely a country descended from immigrants.

If New Zealand opened its borders, how quickly do you think it could grow its
population? My guess is that within a couple of decades, they probably could
add maybe 20 million? The US currently takes about 1.2 million immigrants a
year, and demand is far higher than that.

Do you feel that immigration on this scale would be a good thing for the 4.5
million citizens who currently reside in New Zealand? Or, even if it isn't,
that they have a moral obligation to allow it?

------
acgourley
Cache because it's down:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jMSHaEi...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jMSHaEiBEigJ:blog.bunnyinc.com/us-
immigration-policy-sucks-for-startups/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

------
raverbashing
I wonder what will happen when "the money" realize the US (and SV/SF) is one
of the worse places to assemble a team and is only there because of, guess
what, the money.

You can get work visas for lots of interesting places (Canada, Europe, etc) in
a much shorter time and for a smaller cost

So, yeah, I wouldn't bother with Silicon Valley

~~~
mahyarm
More startups are in SV because of the larger amount of investment capital
that is interested in software and the large amount of people to hire with
very specific skill sets that you may be looking for. It's like thinking you
need food first before you need oxygen, when it's the other way around.

~~~
tankenmate
Indeed this is why places like London which, in total capital terms, is much
bigger than SV doesn't have as many internet focused start ups that reach
massive valuations; there isn't as much internet focused capital floating
around, and that in turn is because UK (and similarly European) companies
don't make as many hi-tech acquisitions as US companies do. Investment is
largely a supply driven business.

------
ChuckMcM
He makes an interesting claim, that immigration policy is doing more harm to
American jobs than helping them. That said, having discovered that the team in
Columbia is performing well, he's worked around the situation.

Unfortunately, hiring is just one piece of many puzzles that have to be solved
when building your business. In 3 to 5 years, or at his first big 'liquidity'
event (acquisition or what ever), where he switches over from 'startup' to
'S&P 500 material', that is when the other externalities of these decisions
will be visible, in the future looking back. At that time, and that will be a
good data point going forward. The cautionary tale is to let a decision that
is working for you _now_ define its total value. Business decisions have very
long tails that stretch into the future.

------
kaeruct
I am a developer that was born in a third-world country in Central America.
There aren't many good opportunities here, but I was lucky enough to land a
remote job with a US company, but before I was considering moving to the US
and getting a job there. I guess next time I should consider a different
country. Maybe Canada? Or somewhere in Europe?

------
_random_
Does he describe how happy the team is living in Colombia AND receiving the
USA-size salary?

~~~
mikkom
In fact he does. How about reading the article?

~~~
_random_
"Colombian salaries aren’t that much lower than US salaries". Seeeeriously
doubt that they are paying $100k to devs (like in SF) in Colombia.

------
wil421
Why do people always complain so much about the US immigration?

From what I have heard from friends abroad is that its just as hard if not
harder in other places.

For example in Costa Rica, just to be able to legally get a cellphone for
yourself you must: be a citizen, a legal resident, or own/start a business.
And we arent talking about a job here, just getting a cellphone.

~~~
syntern
2.5 years ago: I needed to provide both my renting agreement and my full
employment contract to get a T-Mobile $80/m subscription for two, in the mid
of Silicon Valley. The US is definitely making it harder than is should be :)

On the other hand, a close relative went to Singapore about the same time, and
their immigration procedure was smooth, straighforward, everything in place,
no barriers anywhere. Singapore wants to have qualified professionals, the US
see them as numbers.

~~~
wil421
>2.5 years ago: I needed to provide both my renting agreement and my full
employment contract to get a T-Mobile $80/m subscription for two, in the mid
of Silicon Valley. The US is definitely making it harder than is should be :)

Thats horrible! You could go buy a pre paid phone with out having all of the
overhead from T-Mobile.

The difference is that it was probably a T-Mobile policy, not a law or mandate
by the government (like in Costa Rica).

>the US see them as numbers.

Exactly. I wish we were like Singapore but its much easier for a smaller
Country. They see a person as an investvent in the future, the US sees you as
a number and wants your taxes.

~~~
syntern
It has nothing to do with the size of the country. The US sees immigration as
a privilege offered to a lower being [note], while Singapore sees (qualified)
immigration as a way forward.

[note]: This may have been true for a long time in the history. People were
going to the US mainland because their conditions were bad enough, and
anything would have been better elsewhere. I can understand that point of
view, although e.g. my situation is on equal terms in the US vs my home
country. However, I don't think it'll serve the US interest in the long run.

------
edfuh
Looks like your ego didn't allow that. There's plenty of talent in the US.

------
greendata
You should probably fix your website before you extol the virtues of
outsourcing. That said, I think immigration should be more open to everyone.
Big companies get H1-B workers bring wages down for engineers and programmers.
Agriculture, construction and the restaurant industry also thrive on legal and
illegal immigration and also bring the wages down in those industries.
Doctors, lawyers, accounts, etc exist in a protected class of workers. We
should open the gates for H1-B style doctors, lawyers, accountants, and
managers.

~~~
CodeMage
> _Big companies get H1-B workers bring wages down for engineers and
> programmers._

Could you back that up with some hard data? As far as I know, the whole point
behind the H-1Bs is that the companies are not allowed to pay the immigrants
less than you would pay the local talent.

~~~
djb_hackernews
Can't tell if this is sarcasm.

[http://programmersguild.org/archives/howtounderpay.htm](http://programmersguild.org/archives/howtounderpay.htm)

~~~
insuffi
More links for everyone!
[http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2013/05/10-h1b-visa...](http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2013/05/10-h1b-visas-
stem-rothwell-ruiz)

Learn to use google, people.

------
kzin6
Looks like your site is down, perhaps you should reconsider outsourcing to
save a buck.

~~~
almost
Why do you think that people currently resident in the US are inherently
better than those not currently living in the US?

------
joshlegs
I haven't been able to read the article because it's not opening for me. But
the headline sounds like a cheap shot on US immigration policies. But that's
just idiocy. The US lets more immigrants in each year than any other country
in the world.

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/modeledbehavior/2012/11/18/is-
th...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/modeledbehavior/2012/11/18/is-the-u-s-the-
most-immigrant-friendly-country-in-the-world/)

That article tries to make the argument that the US is still not doing well
with immigration because the total population of immigrants compared to the
general population ranks about 23d. But still, if you look at absolute
numbers, the US still allows the most immigrants of any other country. Those
who try to argue that our immigration system is broken simply have some
alternate agenda or hold some sort of spite toward the US, if you ask me.

~~~
funkaster
you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Are you an immigrant? are
you hiring immigrants? Probably not: if you were, you wouldn't be saying that
the system is not broken. There are so many wrong things in the system. Just
to name a couple: H1B allows you to work for _A SPECIFIC_ employer. Spouses of
H1B are _NOT_ allowed to work (not even as a volunteer). And let's not talk
about the implications of work & taxes & healthcare.

~~~
joshlegs
Firstly, you don't have to experience something first hand to know about it.
Secondly, my girlfriend is an immigrant, and she has no problems finding work.
Her parents were immigrants too for that matter, and even owned their own
business here before moving back to England.

So no, the system isn't broken.

~~~
funkaster
Sure, extrapolation with two points: that's way to go.

