
Trump's visa plan leaks: American techies first - mastazi
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/31/trumps_h1b_plan_leaks_american_techies_first/
======
marcus_holmes
<refills popcorn> This'll be interesting.

Tech workers hate Trump, and have been forcing SV bosses to say bad things
about him.

But this move is clearly going to benefit us (well, I'm in Australia so not
affected directly, but "us" as tech workers). Raising tech salaries and
reducing the ridiculous exploitation of immigrant tech workers is good.

SV bosses would clearly like to continue paying less for tech workers, and the
visa program was a tool to do that. They now have a proper reason to say bad
things about Trump.

But Trump would also like to have SV on his side. Where does he think the
power lies there? With the bosses or the workers?

I look forward to next week's episode of "What Trump did to the USA"

~~~
Alex3917
> Raising tech salaries and reducing the ridiculous exploitation of immigrant
> tech workers is good.

Why not keep the H-1B floor at 60,000, but require employers to contribute
another 60,000 to a fund to pay for Americans to be retrained as tech workers?

~~~
Benjamin_Dobell
I don't think that's particularly fair on immigrants. It sets a double
standard as to what people are worth.

PS. Also Australian... yeah, we're awake at this time.

EDIT:

To clarify, I'm not at all suggesting screw over Americans either. I'd not be
thrilled working in any industry where I'd spent years getting qualifications,
just to be constantly undercut by any group of people.

However, I don't think encouraging companies to underpay a certain segment of
humans is an ethical way to resolve the problem.

~~~
Alex3917
> I don't think that's particularly fair on immigrants. It sets a double
> standard as to what people are worth.

How so? The minimum wage for H-1Bs is over 4x higher than the minimum wage for
Americans.

If Americans had a minimum wage of 60k per year and immigrants were getting
paid $7.25 per hour then that would be one thing, but it's currently the other
way around.

~~~
Benjamin_Dobell
So, ah... What you want is the _American_ minimum wage increased to $100,000
and to leave the _immigrant_ minimum wage at $60,000?

Yeah... I can't see that being abused at all. Good luck with that.

------
kcorbitt
I'm in favor of vastly raising the H1-B cap, or eliminating it altogether.
But. If we _are_ going to have an H1-B cap, I think awarding the visas to the
highest-paid applicants is probably the most fair way to administer it. I know
of no better way to objectively measure "in high demand" than "well-paid."

~~~
WalterBright
Does this mean that any applicant can set their salary requirements at
$300,000 and nobody else can be hired until they are?

~~~
Benjamin_Dobell
I was wondering about this same thing. Highest paid doesn't equate to highest
skilled at all.

The scheme seems more designed to punish companies from hiring immigrants than
actually ensuring only high quality employees make their way to Silicon
Valley.

Admittedly, I think increasing the $60,000 figure seems reasonable. It should
be set at a figure (and updated regularly enough) such that it's slightly
_above_ the average wage in the industry. That way it's really targeting
_skilled_ workers, as opposed to cheap workers.

~~~
DanAndersen
>The scheme seems more designed to punish companies from hiring immigrants
than actually ensuring only high quality employees make their way to Silicon
Valley.

I'd say you're exactly right (perhaps replace "punish" with "disincentivize"
for more broad agreement), as concerns about the place of domestic labor in
the face of foreign labor was the major campaign issue, rather than a desire
on the part of the US electorate to refine/optimize the talent pool of Bay
area international workers.

------
amalag
Something should be done as long as we hear stories like this from Disney and
other companies: [http://www.computerworld.com/article/3077302/it-
careers/it-l...](http://www.computerworld.com/article/3077302/it-careers/it-
layoffs-at-insurance-firm-are-a-never-ending-funeral.html)

~~~
astrodust
There's a substantial difference between actions like that where they're
clearly out-sourcing to slash costs and situations where you're trying to
build an engineering team with top talent and want to tap the top 1% from all
over the world, not just the local labor pool.

The reason there's a lot of foreign workers in the valley is becaus these
companies poach the _best_. Just look at how many Canadian software
engineering graduates are sponged up by Valley firms: It's a constant drain on
talent. The Valley picks the best because in many cases the Valley can pay the
best rates. This is not "We hired X because they were 50% cheaper than Y",
it's "We hired X _and_ Y because they're the best in their fields."

Attacking foreign workers as a whole is a serious problem. These firms _want_
the best talent, and the best talent is not exclusively American.

Attacking deliberate undercutting efforts like Disney's is something that's
reasonable. Disney had a team that could do the job that they cut loose so
they could hire _another_ cheaper team using foreign workers. That shouldn't
be as easy to do as it is.

Don't think that slamming the door on foreign workers will magically make
American salaries go up. It'll mean the average talent will go down, and
salaries will be roughly the same for the same amount of talent anyway.

These companies will just open up satellite offices and hire foreign workers
anyway. They just won't pay American taxes.

~~~
snogglethorpe
I suspect another reason that politicians are so eager to stomp on H1B workers
is because they're an easy target: most people don't care, and the H1B workers
themselves can't vote, so pandering to anti-foreigner hysteria is a good bet
for a politician...

------
trishume
I think this is n-th hand reporting of the exact same draft executive order
that has been out for weeks. It is just repeating speculation of other news
sources as to what the actual reforms will be and losing some of the fact that
it is mere speculation.

The draft circulated weeks ago merely says to investigate the program and
propose to better protect American workers and prioritize hiring the best,
with no concrete proposals.

~~~
natvert
Ok, but a more interesting question is that if it is true (or something very
similar is in the works) is it a good idea?

------
kylehotchkiss
I am finding the occasional reference to immigrant tech workers going back to
their home countries and launching good teach business at home to be a
positive thing. Seeing developing country with new tech scenes come around to
solve their own local problems is inspiring to me. It gives me hope that tech
really can change the world...

------
refurb
What about non-tech workers that come to the US through an H1-B? Scientists
come to mind. If you don't have a PhD, your starting salary isn't going to
exceed $100K. Are they just out of luck?

~~~
DanAndersen
There's already a good number of US-citizen PhDs in non-CS/"tech" fields who
are being underutilized. Perhaps such moves will help prioritize them and
adjust some of the supply/demand issues.

~~~
wdcgu
Not all PhDs are equal. You're not hiring them to flip burgers at McDonald's

------
jlardinois
Two questions (one fact-based, one opinion)

1\. This article notes that the various proposed H1B reforms would require
(for some definition of require) that companies make an effort to hire
Americans before offering positions to visa workers. Isn't this already a
requirement?

2\. I agree $60,000 is a very low minimum. But how is $130,000 reasonable?
Even in this industry that's a significant salary.

~~~
talklittle
> _2\. I agree $60,000 is a very low minimum. But how is $130,000 reasonable?
> Even in this industry that 's a significant salary._

The current administration is businesspeople. They know $130k sounds too high,
it's anchoring for negotiations. It'll go lower.

But also it's kind of the point of the reform being pushed, right? If somehow
$130k is passed, it will obviously disqualify most foreign workers from
acquiring these visas, and maybe the current quota of visas wouldn't be met.
Then the quota may be lowered in the future, further limiting the visa
program.

~~~
jlardinois
The 130k minimum was proposed by a Democratic congresswoman, not the
administration.

------
purity_resigns
What are ways companies skirt L1 laws? I always assumed offshoring was done
through a country with the laxest visa laws possible.

~~~
pkaye
The L1 has no quota so it is used to get around the H1B quota. They just have
to form a shell company in the other country, have employees stick around for
an year and then come over under the L1 visa. There are no education
requirements unlike an H1B. There are no prevailing wage requirements unlike
an H1B.

~~~
mavelikara
> They just have to form a shell company in the other country, have employees
> stick around for an year and then come over under the L1 visa.

That does not sound easy as you make it out to be.

~~~
pkaye
Not easy but if you are hiring enough employees then it can be cost effective.

------
tn13
Isn't this the same "leaked executive" order that was being discussed few days
back ? This news items has nothing new. Also, government's "American First"
approach would always result into another mess like "war on drugs". Somehow
American workers should come first but not the American company!

> Raising tech salaries and reducing the ridiculous exploitation of immigrant
> tech workers is good.

Why not raise it to $200K or another arbitrary number if increasing wages are
a good thing ? All increased wages would mean american corporations will be
less competitive and hence it hurts average American consumer who perhaps is
more poorer than the tech worker.

I sense "American First" is more of a "No Browns and Asians" that is likely to
hurt entire tech industry.

------
Upvoter33
There is clearly need for reform here. Careful thought and a deep
understanding of what is good for tech, and for workers, should both be
considered. Unfortunately, careful thought and deep understanding is not what
this administration has shown itself to be about.

------
unityByFreedom
The H1-B program isn't just about techies. Translators, for example, might not
demand a $130,000 salary, yet the top talent will often be foreign.

I'm sure Trump would like SV to form a movement behind this, much like the
inroads he's trying to make with various tech leaders. It's just not as simple
as looking at one type of worker and calling it a day.

Any changes to such a policy would need to be properly vetted across all
industries.

------
marze
Cringley discussed the L-1B issue on Feb 6:

[http://www.cringely.com/2017/02/06/trumps-upcoming-
move-h-1b...](http://www.cringely.com/2017/02/06/trumps-upcoming-
move-h-1b-visas/)

~~~
kmonsen
L-1B suppresses wages more than H-1B because it is not transferable. Not
getting any raises? Only option is to go back home or accept it.

~~~
sjg007
I'm sure the lawyers will figure out how to abuse the L1 if H1B reforms are
brought in. At least on the IT consulting side.

------
goku7
there is nothing about trump's plans in this article. 130k and everything else
were bills introduced by senators. they have very little chance of becoming
law.

------
kyriakos
Won't this push companies to hire remote workers as contractors instead for
even lower salaries?

~~~
pliftkl
This. Many people (usually on the right) argue that increased minimum wages
cost people jobs because companies that rely on low-wage, low-skilled will
simply automate, because the companies are going to follow basic economic
principles. A high wage barrier to H1B workers makes hiring overseas workers
more attractive, and if companies can get the model working well (where
offshore tech teams do a great job), that's worse in the long run for American
tech workers.

------
mjmsmith
Huh, over 30 stories posted in the last 24 hours with "Trump" in the title,
only 2 with more than 20 points, and they're both relatively pro-Trump.
Interesting.

------
sjg007
130k.. big raise.

