
There is no shortage of STEM workers - Futurebot
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2016/02/08/there-no-shortage-stem-workers/79871624/
======
myNXTact
>The truth, however, is quite different. For example, Clemson’s engineering
enrollment has reached almost 5,300 students – an 80 percent increase since
2008!

Enrollment numbers for engineering students are not really relevant. It is the
graduation numbers. Engineering programs are notorious for "weeding out" large
numbers of students. His salary statistics are scary though.

~~~
pmiller2
How much of those salary statistics are just reflections of general trends? An
0.4% increase per year over 12 years compounds to roughly a 5% increase. Given
the stats at
[http://proximityone.com/statetrendsmhi_20002012.htm](http://proximityone.com/statetrendsmhi_20002012.htm)
, we see that only two states had an increase in median income higher than
that (and one, ND, is surely due to an oil boom).

What I find more sobering is that the real US median income decreased 6.6%
from 2000-2012.

~~~
Outdoorsman
>What I find more sobering is that the real US median income decreased 6.6%
from 2000-2012.<

I think your point is very important...

My take is that this can fundamentally be attributed to our (increasingly
full) participation in the "global economy"...

For years jobs have been out-sourced "within" countries by a process of
competitive bidding...we Americans have done this for years and consider it
fair...we refer to it as a level playing field...

Surprise...the global economy dictates that whoever is willing to do a good
job cheaply--provide the same benefit at a reduced cost--has a very realistic
shot at eventually filling a position...one way or another...

That's what I find sobering...regardless of your country of origin, or your
particular skill set there are now many more just like you--equally qualified
--who are willing to provide what you provide at a lower salary...

We're part of a "great leveling"...

~~~
throwaway2048
tell that to the 0.01% making far more than ever before

~~~
Outdoorsman
That's one (of many) of the reasons they're making far more...out-sourced
labor...

------
mindcrime
Part of the problem is this whole thing of use "STEM" as though it identifies
a cohesive / unified group of employment positions. It's too much of a catch-
all and there's room for TONS of variance _within_ the overall "STEM" rubric.
For example, you could have raging demand for software engineers at the same
time you're having massive layoffs among, say, chemical engineers. So what can
you say about "STEM" as a whole in that case? Very little.

IOW, precision matters and we should be leery of over-generalizing.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
...except, chemical engineers never get laid off. Those folks rock, and are
always in high demand.

~~~
gojomo
Perhaps that's true in your experience, but 'STEM' also includes jobs as
varied as 'actuary', 'geographer', 'dental hygienist', 'soil technician',
'physical therapist', and 'anthropologist'.

~~~
dalke
I'll add 'string theorist', 'paleobotanist', 'exoplanetologist',
'dendrochronologist', and 'parapsychologist'.

When politicians (or most people, for that matter) talk about needing more
people in STEM, they don't usually mean to increase funding for these fields.
Rather, "STEM" is short-hand for "the sorts of people who solve problems that
are useful for industry, business, and health."

------
gorkemyurt
Does it really matter how many H1-Bs you allow every year? Look at how many
big companies are opening offices in other cities especially in Vancouver or
London just because of visa issues. Limiting H1-Bs is just going to force
Facebooks and Googles to open up overseas dev centers. At least a high paid
H1-B worker helps the American Economy in some ways.. He/She pays a ton of
taxes, buys real estate and hopefully employs other Americans..

~~~
CoryAmber
Does it matter? Of course, otherwise this wouldn't be the contentious issue
that it is. If you are the Disney programmer telling your wife and kids that
you are unemployed, I assure you, it matters.

To say it doesn't matter if there are 0 H1-Bs or 250,000 H1-Bs is ...

Your "high paid H1-B worker" most likely isn't (see data contained in the
referenced article). Outside of a small percentage of very rare individuals or
specialists every H1-B is taking a job from a US citizen, who would pay the
same taxes or more, is far more likely to buy real estate than rent a nearby
apartment for a couple of years, and will almost assuredly un-employ some
American than hopefully employ one.

~~~
welder
> every H1-B is taking a job from a US citizen

Do US Citizens deserve a job more than a non-citizen? Get off your high horse
and see you are no more different than other people around the world!

~~~
skylan_q
_Do US Citizens deserve a job more than a non-citizen?_ The original article
stated that the prof. didn't understand why american politicians were trying
to get more STEM-educated/skilled people into the US.

1) Rubio is bought by Microsoft. They're his biggest donor. (or 2nd biggest
depending on how you dice the numbers) MS' profit margins would benefit from
driving wages down. 2) The job of the politicians of the United States is to
make life better for American citizens, not people abroad.

~~~
davidw
Importing highly skilled, hard working people most certainly _does_ make our
lives better.

~~~
SudoNhim
It goes both ways though. I feel pretty terrible about finishing my government
sponsored education in New Zealand then ditching for better prospects here in
the US. Where the size of the tech sector is limited by the number of
engineers, every engineer lost to an H1B is lost exports, lost jobs, lost
taxes....

~~~
davidw
Plenty of people go off to work somewhere else and then return home with a
pile of money and skills. So it's not like you get on a boat, never to see
home again.

The economies of some countries (poorer ones) benefit _greatly_ from
remittances.

------
briantmaurer
Quantity and quality are not the same thing. The economy needs various
quantities of engineers at various skill levels. Within the same field of
study there could be a shortage of talent at one skill level and a surplus at
another skill level.

Based on my own experience and the experiences of my friends (people who work
as engineers for AWS, Google, Apple, Facebook, SpaceX, etc.), there is a big
shortage in 'high quality' engineers.

~~~
CoryAmber
One hears that espoused quite frequently.

Assuming there is "a big shortage in 'high quality' engineers" can anyone
provide links to any AWS, Google, Apple, Facebook, SpaceX, position postings
which typifies this big shortage? e.g. Postings which are an exemplar, of
requiring 'high quality engineers' but remain open for weeks or months due to
the massive STEM shortage? Based on the I-squared Act's proposed increase to a
1/4 million (250,000) H1-Bs there should be 10s and 10s of 10,000s such
postings.

This massive STEM shortage debate has been happening for years. The referenced
article links studies, presents supporting data (aka actual statistics) and
provides direct anecdotal evidence (he is involved in the production of STEM
resources). Bluntly I have seen many similar fact based articles and studies
on the "there is no STEM shortage" side and can't recall a single peer
reviewed study on the massive shortage side. Links welcome.

~~~
briantmaurer
Your assumption is not necessarily true.

A single job posting can remain active indefinitely and does not necessarily
represent just one open position.

This leads to the situation where an outsider sees one 'job posting' and
thousands of applicants while Tech Co sees a shortage because only a few of
those applicants are qualified.

Also, there is an incentive mis-match between people who realize there is a
shortage and people wanting to prove that a shortage exists. If as a 'high
quality engineer' you realize you are a scarce resource, and that makes you a
lot of $, why would you want to convince other people to acquire the skills
you have – self inflicted devaluation?

This is why the people with the loudest voices on this issue are CEOs and VCs
who were previously high quality engineers. They have a clear view, the data,
and the monetary incentive to vocalize it – more high quality engineers will
increase their $.

~~~
CoryAmber
Your assumption is not necessarily true.

> A single job posting can remain active indefinitely and does not necessarily
> represent just one open position.

I have asked about this already, several times in several postings. At this
point, I'll take but one concrete example. Could you post one link, a single
link, of one of these (from I assume a huge population) endless job postings
from say Google, Facebook, Apple, HP, IBM, ... well from anyone, which
represents a huge quantity of unfillable positions with near zero qualified
applicants? I am curious for just one example. One.

Of course CEOs and VCs want engineers at the cheapest rates possible to
increase their bottom line. Yes, indeed they have both monetary incentive and
the means to exercise the political influence towards that goal. I don't see
how that provides any proof or even marginal evidence that there is a massive
STEM shortage.

If these CEOs and VCs have the data I have never seen it shared. Not one
smidgen of detailed HR data.

Again, the original referenced article does offer up evidence of its premise
and cites several studies, a PBS documentary, statistics, etc.

I understand you believe there is a massive shortage of STEM people unable to
fill countless blackholes of open positions. Maybe this is just too big an
ask, can you provide any evidence, at all? A link to a peer reviewed study
from academia? Or maybe a link to detailed testimony from Apple's or
Microsoft's CEO on capital hill. Any definitive numbers?? Anything at all?

~~~
briantmaurer
Find almost any job posting labeled 'Software Engineer', 'Software Developer'
, 'Software Development Engineer', 'Product Manger', 'Project Manager', etc.
for a reasonably large growing tech company. That posting will almost
certainly represent multiple jobs.

Here is one example:
[https://stripe.com/jobs/positions/engineer](https://stripe.com/jobs/positions/engineer)

That single job listing (Engineer at Stripe) represents ALL of their Engineer
hires, and likely 100x-1000x as many rejected applications as hires. That
posting has been there for years. There are not enough qualified people to
fill the role.

There are many, many companies that operate this way.

------
stale2002
He gets cause and effect wrong. The reason why enrollments are so high is
BECAUSE of the shortage. An increase in demand for X causes wages for X to
increase. This increase in wages causes more people to want to supply X, by
joining that field.

Also, the common argument of "There is no shortage for X, people just want to
pay less money, than the current, extremely high price of X", is completely
nonsensical.

The DEFINITION of a shortage is "I believe the price is too high". Thats how
supply and demand works.

Example: Imagine if bread costed 100$ a loaf. Is there a shortage of food, or
is it just people complaining that the price of bread is too high?

How else would you even define a shortage other than "the price is too high"?

~~~
LordKano
_How else would you even define a shortage other than "the price is too
high"?_

More people want to buy product or service X than there is currently available
in the marketplace.

So, let's say that during the next growing season, some new fungus appears and
decimates the US grain crop. That will result in bread shortages. Even at $100
per loaf, there won't be as much bread available as there are people looking
to buy it.

~~~
Nutmog
That definition doesn't work. If bread was 1 cent per loaf, I bet more people
would buy it. So all those people who currently aren't buying bread because it
costs a couple of dollars are people who want bread but there isn't enough
available. Does that mean we always have a bread shortage? Maybe we do. But
then it becomes a useless definition.

If it cost $100 per loaf, there would again be people who want it but can't
buy it, just as the situation already is but more of them.

~~~
zanny
If bread was 1 cent per loaf, bread would be near worthless. The people who
cannot afford bread are not economically generating enough demand for bread to
have more bread created. Markets do not care how much you intrinsically _want_
something - that is not what market demand is - demand is simply a measure of
how much money is willing to be spent on a good or service. The more money
seeking bread, the more pressure there is on bread makers to make more,
because each loaf is more valuable. If there is no money seeking bread - ie,
the poor - then nobody has a reason to make bread, because there is no profit
to be made.

Capitalism is literally defined by the perpetual shortage of scarce physical
resources. Bread costs what it does because people _want_ it - that means they
do not already have it - and are willing to pay so much for it. And the
highest bidders get their bread, with the price being set at approximately the
lowest bidder who would still get a finite loaf of bread if they were dolled
out in sequence of most demand to least, while anyone below that "bid" amount
does not get bread.

If bread were market valued at $100 a loaf, it would mean _either_ more people
are willing to pay more for the same bread - say, someone wants to buy _all_
the bread and offers way above market price to capture the bread supply - or
the supply itself has diminished enough that the lowest bidders at $1 and $10
and $99 were too far back in line to get bread behind all those willing to pay
$100 or more.

If something is worth value in market exchange, it means someone wants
something they do not have, and are willing to pay an amount of money for it.
Demand is dictated by the total amount of money seeking something, and supply
is determined by how much of something can fill that demand. And demand can
include those seeking loaves of bread for a cent - but it is very unlikely
their demand will ever be met, because they offer so little in return.

------
pdeuchler
This seems like a political hit piece with no real substance.

Salaries aren't going up because employers are conspiring to push down
wages[0] and non executive wages in general are stagnating or going down[1].
Furthermore as already stated elsewhere in this thread, STEM degrees have huge
wash out percentages so "freshmen enrolled" is just as good a statistic as
"college freshman who plan on changing the world". The real problem, which has
been repeated ad nauseam here, is that there's a shortage of STEM workers at
the wages employers are willing to pay.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-
Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-
Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation) [1]
[https://rwer.wordpress.com/2016/01/16/percent-change-in-
u-s-...](https://rwer.wordpress.com/2016/01/16/percent-change-in-u-s-real-
wages-by-income-percentile-2007-2014/)

------
forgottenpass
Publicized "shortage" \+ stagnant wages = An attempt to lower employee costs
by getting more people into the labor pool.

------
Nutmog
Wow - look at the arrogance here:

"there are no worker protections to prevent companies from firing American
workers, replacing them with H-1B’s, and even forcing them to train their
replacements"

Another name for "worker shortage" is "high wages". You can't fix one without
fixing the other at the same time.

If high priced workers are replaced with cheaper ones then all else being
equal, it means the company is operating more efficiently. Isn't that a good
thing? Good for the economy, good for consumers and only bad for the overpaid
workers. What does he expect? That workers who demand more than the market
rate should have their jobs protected so they don't feel bad about the economy
changing around them? Even at the expense of everyone else?

~~~
CoryAmber
The referenced article presents a case that there is no STEM worker shortage
and supports it with referenced statistics and studies. You may dispute his
data, but he did provide it. Stating a position on the assumption that there
is a serious problem with excessive or high wages, i.e. overpaid workers which
requires immediate fixing is an odd leap.

What workers are demanding more that the market rate? There is a market rate
with a 1/4 million H1-Bs and there is a market rate without a 1/4 million
H1-Bs. Any worker which demands more than the market rate will not get it.

And what is the expense of everyone else referring too? It is substantially a
zero sum game. Who are the else?

------
thecourier
Do you remember that time Steve Jobs and Obama had dinner and discussed
engineering immigration?

[http://www.businessinsider.com/when-steves-jobs-and-
barack-o...](http://www.businessinsider.com/when-steves-jobs-and-barack-obama-
dined-2015-1)

"Jobs continued to press the engineering angle at the dinner, saying that at
the time Apple employed 700,000 factory workers in China, plus 30,000
engineers to support those workers."

We need the best talent of the world to be a technological leader nation.
nonetheless, there is a big amount of jobs that need a good engineer but not a
bright mind as Wozniak.

This is how globalization works and we need to keep up or be defeated by a
better player at accepting STEM immigration. Let the fear aside, confront the
global arena and struggle to keep being leaders of the world.

~~~
HillaryBriss
It's interesting that the two options Steve Jobs mentioned were:

1\. Put the factory and the jobs in China

2\. Put the factory and the jobs in the US, using workers who are imported
(from China/India/et al)

Why doesn't Jobs mention an option to, oh, I don't know, _make a commitment to
the millions of people who are already in the US_ looking for work?

And, who better than Apple itself to train up some _existing_ members of the
US labor pool in how to do what Apple does?

To the extent that "American" corporations are shells that import manufactured
goods from foreign factories and import engineers from foreign societies, I
have to wonder whether I give a crap if the US is a "technological leader."

Maybe if some Chinese investors bought Apple and moved the whole mess to
Shenzhen, the world would finally get reasonable prices on (and customization
of) Apple hardware.

~~~
jjtheblunt
The vast majority of the factory jobs are automatable, and will vanish in
time, and have likely been continually vanishing.

That reality would sit poorly with Americans who didn't see it coming, and
certainly with those trying to use offshore manufacturing for political
support, but that's been the plan all along.

------
whack
_" 87 percent of current H-1B holders are paid wages in the bottom third"_

I'm going to call bogus on this. The law requires H1B holders to be paid the
prevailing market wage, or more, for their profession/experience level. The
fact that he's referencing Trump's election platform, and doesn't offer any
other evidence of this, doesn't give me any confidence whatsoever.

I'd also like to issue a challenge to anyone who claims that the H1B system we
currently have is bad: Please propose an alternate form of immigration system.
Please also specify details regarding

1) How many immigrants should be allowed into the country every year

2) How the above number of immigrants should be selected, amongst all
potential applicants.

~~~
to3m
Interested readers can see for themselves what the salaries are using the H1-B
data:
[https://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/performancedata.cfm](https://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/performancedata.cfm)
(select Disclosure Data section, download PERM spreadsheet - haven't checked
the latest set but when I looked last year it was pretty easy to understand)

------
jmspring
I really hate the H1B issue. It should be open to "high skilled,
essential/lacking labor". We have many universities in the US that will grant
an MS or similar degree without much substance for a nominal (but not
negligible fee).

A simple revamp to the program would be simple: \- Absolutely zero visas (or
very few) to any of the outsourcing / bodyshop companies - Tata, etc.

\- A company found bringing workers in on a Visa to be trained and then lay
people off, the company should face a significant fine.

\- Companys have to show if there is on one side a significant downsizing and
then sudden rehiring that includes H1Bs, that they didn't offer training and
mentorship before laying some of the original people off. IBM and Disney come
to mind.

\- Keep or impose caps by region. Sorry, we are a melting pot, but certain
countries have significantly higher numbers trying to come in than others. The
best companies and groups I worked with were diverse rather than monoculture
work places.

Personally, I do like the score based system that Canada and Australia
generally have.

EDIT/Addition:

\- The original mentality of cost being the overarching factor has become less
en vogue. Many companies started insourcing again. That said, it's still not
wholly reversed most of the outsourcing going on.

 __I know outsourcing does not equate with H1B wholly, but there are companies
that abuse the visas to hire cheaper, have locals train, and fire the locals.

~~~
jjtheblunt
Caps by employment region would be "interesting" since it seems H1B is
clamored for uniquely in Silicon Valley, where (as an American engineer) there
are really few Americans, which contrasts entirely with other regions of the
United States. It seems that is because Americans are averse to the
unaffordability of SV, and recognize that unaffordability is a trap for
foreigners.

~~~
jmspring
Actually that is a different but interesting take on what I meant. I meant by
geographic region of the proposed Visa holder -- these are sorta in place for
some, but not others. My main feeling there is that if there are a surplus of
people well skilled in a particular country that feel the need to immigrate,
maybe there should be a focus on doing something locally to build up a base.

Regionally by US demographic could be interesting. A lot of the insourcing of
things like support and call centers are going to regions of the US where
costs are lower, but there is still an educational base. Though, surprisingly,
some areas like Eugene/Springfield, OR are getting pretty hard hit -- though
that may mostly be troubled due to Symantec's financial issues.

------
ap3
As a former H1B the whole system is unfair and a scam.

It is unfair to US workers: Right after I was hired at the very next downturn
coworker's were let go but I stayed. I didn't know it at the time but my
salary was low.

It is unfair to the H1B worker - you can't switch jobs easily. If you are
fired you have to leave the country, it is very stressful. You can't plan your
future - why invest for retirement ?

There is a path to a green card but only if employer sponsors at considerable
cost.

It only benefits the employers.

If there is a true shortage of tech workers make the system better by allowing
full mobility and allowing the workers to directly apply for green card
without sponsorship. It could start by demanding employer's pay prevailing
wage plus a 25k deposit/bond towards future unemployment or immigration costs
of employee + family, and employee is able to switch jobs after 6 months with
h1b sponsor

------
cbryan
It's almost as if engineers should get together and advocate for themselves as
a group.

~~~
gozur88
Or not. I certainly wouldn't want to be part of a union.

~~~
whybroke
Is that because you personally have such enormous bargaining power (inspite of
a flood of STEM workers)?

Or is it because employers always spontaneously pay the highest wages they
possibly can and never, ever treat employees unethically let alone break the
law?

Or is that because the current political system is so very, very good at
protecting the interests of employees or because market forces do it so very,
very, well?

~~~
dagw
Personally it's because every union seems to be either so big as to be
corrupt, highly inefficient and far too busy with petty power struggles to
ever care about my insignificant problems or so small as to be essentially
powerless.

~~~
whybroke
Out of curiosity, what actually cite-able numbers regarding wages and working
conditions when comparing organized vs unorganized labor lead you to the
conclusion that you will always be worse off in every possible organization
even including one not yet created?

~~~
dagw
None, and I'll freely admit that it's certainly possible that there may exist
a hypothetical union where I may very well be better off as a member. I'll
also concede that the abstract idea and theory of unions sounds perfectly
reasonable to me. It's the broken, imperfect, real world implementations of
those ideas that always rubs me the wrong way and that I find fault with.

~~~
whybroke
The internal workings of every western democracy's govenrment vastly exceeds
the inefficiencies and corruption of any union I can think of. Yet I don't
find being in one so repugnant that I want to leave.

The question of relevance is whether an employee is better off or not. And
when organized, employees always enjoy high wages and better conditions.

And, whether organization is personally annoying or not, as a lone individual
you will have essentially no power to protect yourself let alone your
profession in anyway.

------
Nursie
Something I've suspected for a while here in the UK too.

There's no shortage of available workers, there's a shortage of companies
willing to pay well.

------
planetjones
That website was quite an attack on mobile safari:

\- intrusive overlay (tick) \- prompting to use my location (tick) \- huge
ugly advert mixed into content (tick)

------
carsongross
The highest-voted comments are all critical of the article and/or supportive
of the H1B program?

Hmmm.

