H1-b

[D.Abramowitz]

While the actual number of H-1B visas is small compared to the size of the American work force as a whole, the concept irks many professionals. Six of the top 10 users of temporary work visas in 2007 were Indian firms, with Infosys Technologies having 4,559 approved visa petitions and Wipro some 2,567. Two companies with U.S. headquarters but that mostly operate in India—Cognizant Technology Systems and UST Global—were also among the top 10.

And therein lies the biggest problem with H1-B and L-1 Visas: No one knows who is actually using the labor!

The companies listed above are essentially body shops that farm out labor to their customers. The firms that use this labor do not actually hire the visa holder, and therefore do not have to fill out any forms, or comply with any government regulations.

The end result is that a job may be taken by a visa holder at a cheap rate, while an American loses their job, and the firm that uses the labor is not accountable for anything, because the employer is actually someone else (i.e. Wipro, Infosys, etc.)

Recent changes to H1-B have made this practice a little more difficult, but until H1-B legislation completely restricts an employer from farming out their employees to other firms, then H1-B will remain a sham.

Dave

[jgolds2]

Thanks for your efforts David

I know you have been following this issue closely for many years.

[D.Abramowitz]

Sometimes I get the feeling that my congressman is sick of me by this time. He thinks I sound like a broken record, but at the same time, I am urged not to give up.

My conversations with my congressman and his staffers, and my senator's staffers (I have not yet had any personal conversations with a senator, but I do have a couple of nice letters) indicate that only the persistence of continual individual efforts will make a difference. The results will be (or should be) laws with which we all can live.

I strongly urge all who feel this way to write letters (not petitions) to their representatives. You may be surprised at the results.

Dave

[efnkay]

Hey Dave, unless you also worked where they were commonly hired. I saw more H1-B visas (translate as foreigners) at Honeywell, IBM, Peoplesoft, the list goes on and on, you name the company, and I gauarantee you, they used them...and still do!!!

[D.Abramowitz]

Efnkay,

You may have seen them at Honeywell, IBM, Peoplesoft, etc. . . . . . .But. . .

Were they actually hired by these companies??

That is my point. Records are only reported for the hiring companies, not the companies that actually use the labor.

If the hiring firm is Tata, or Infosys, or Wipro, or similar then the firms that actually use the labor are (IMO) skirting H1-B laws. The actual hiring firms (body shops) are also not fully complying with requirements that US Citizens are to be considered first for the jobs. In point of fact US Citizens are not considered at all!

The most recent records show that the five out of the top ten H1-B employers are in fact body shops. If a visa holder is farmed out to IBM, then there is no reporting to government that IBM is using H1-B labor (at least for the individual in my example).

It is not even a fine point. Included in H1-B legislation is the requirement that the employer document an actual need for employing an H1-B visa holder over a US Citizen. How could the employer actually have this need if the visa holder will be farmed out, and end up doing work for a company that does not have to submit any paper work whatsoever? Although that company uses the labor of the visa holder, they are not the employer, the body shop is the employer.

I stand by my original statement.

Dave

[efnkay]

Uh, no, yeah, absolutely...I'm just concurring that they are there. Still are there en-masse. And how they have kept the H1-b's under the blankets from gov't eyes was never doubted, simply assumed that they must be doing so without getting any bad press for it either...!!!

[R.Khoury]

It always boils down to money. When in doubt, look for the economic incentive. As long as its less expensive to bring in foreign workers, then most companies will take that route. And our government is complicit. So don't blame the corporations, they're in it purely for the money. It's our representatives that are to blame for allowing this - they make the laws and they can change the laws. Let's see, we elect them to represent our interests and they do the opposite. Hmmm...

Just read some of the rules regarding H1-B visas, its beyond frustrating.

Under current law, an alien can be in H-1B status for a maximum period of six years at a time. After that time an alien must remain outside the United States for one year before another H-1B petition can be approved. Certain aliens working on Defense Department projects may remain in H-1B status for 10 years. In addition, certain aliens may obtain an extension of H-1B status beyond the 6-year maximum period, when: 365 days or more have passed since the filing of any application for labor certification, Form ETA 750, that is required or used by the alien to obtain status as an EB immigrant, or
365 days or more have passed since the filing of an EB immigrant petition. (from USCIS web site)

So, while unemployment is at 9.7% and true unemployment is about 16%, we can have foreign workers here doing work for up to 6 years that unemployed/underemployed American workers could do.

Dave, keep up the good work. It's a topic that should remain high on our list.

[D.Abramowitz]

R. Khoury,

It's much worse than that.

H1-B was always intended to be a temporaryvisa. Congress has always had this picture of the visa holder returning to the country of origin after the six year period.

Anyone working in a large IT shop knows that this has not been the case. The immigration department, working independently of those who monitor H1-B visas, has routinely issued green cards (which happen to be pink, not green) to H1-B visa holders. My evidence for this is empircal, and anecdotal, as there are no figures or records for this transition. But, this is how the six year period turns into twenty.

It is very frustrating discussing this aspect of H1-B with congressional staffers. Most responses have been a complete denial of this as fact. It has taken years for some of them to come around.

The bright spot about this economic crisis, is that more H1-B visas than ever are being denied. New legislation makes it much harder for body shops to hire H1-B holders.

H1-B is not the only thing we have to be concerned about.

The L-1 visa was specifically designed for executives. It is now used (and greatly abused) for the lowest level worker. More about this in another post.

Section 1706 of the tax reform act of 1986 has ersulted in arcane requirements for independent contractors that have nothing whatsoever to do with the law, but are being imposed using section 1706 as a rationale. This law should be repealed.

Individual letters to your representatives do actually mean a lot. write one today!

Dave

[rsp]

Newer H1B requirements require

Since Y2009, for renewal of H1B visas we have to provide a letter from the end client in your example (IBM/GE/Oracle etc) that they (end client) would require your services at that location for "n" many months etc.
Despite providing the letter, for few of my friends, the USCIS rejected the request for some of them. Lucky some of them had the EAD to turn back on. This is not for new persons applying H1B for the first time. It was for guys who renewed their visas after being here for many years. Now while my renewal was applied if I was at IBM, USCIS will know that. But imagine I move to GE after 6 months, I doubt if USCIS gets the update. But we do a Labor Clearance document if we move to a place that is different from the original place of work.

As a H1B holder awaiting my GC I am somewhat disheartened by the tone of some people here, but I see your point. I am right now in the same state as you are now and we are in the same boat. Every job outsourced/ in-sourced to same organization in other countries affects both of us similarly. Giving more choice in the marketplace only makes things cheaper. Whether it is affordability/race to the bottom is something that there will always be a argument for/against.

I agree that the ones getting the maximum benefits are big corporations. The ones that get shafted are IT Knowledge workers(that includes you and me).

Basically the H1B program has made the IT Workforce a commodity. But look @ the variance of costs in a city like New York compared to say Iowa/Nebraska. Ultimately all these companies will say "costs" to continue with their business. The current client I work for has IT Centers in really expensive cities and less expensive ones (both in US, UK etc). Guess where they are hiring and where they are firing in this economy?

For a H1B there are fees that we pay to the system http://www.h1base.com/visa/work/H1B%...Fees/ref/1186/.

As H1Bs we spend our money renewing the visa every year (after the 6 yr term till I140 gets approved). We pay taxes as usual but also pay SS and Medicare that we simply cannot use at all (read that no unemployment benefits or anything). I am telling you there is no difference betn. what I would pay as a H1B holder compared to what a PR/Citizen would pay. The only diff. is that I will not get any returns for what I pay into the system.

Efnkay,

You may have seen them at Honeywell, IBM, Peoplesoft, etc. . . . . . .But. . .

Were they actually hired by these companies??

That is my point. Records are only reported for the hiring companies, not the companies that actually use the labor.

If the hiring firm is Tata, or Infosys, or Wipro, or similar then the firms that actually use the labor are (IMO) skirting H1-B laws. The actual hiring firms (body shops) are also not fully complying with requirements that US Citizens are to be considered first for the jobs. In point of fact US Citizens are not considered at all!

The most recent records show that the five out of the top ten H1-B employers are in fact body shops. If a visa holder is farmed out to IBM, then there is no reporting to government that IBM is using H1-B labor (at least for the individual in my example).

It is not even a fine point. Included in H1-B legislation is the requirement that the employer document an actual need for employing an H1-B visa holder over a US Citizen. How could the employer actually have this need if the visa holder will be farmed out, and end up doing work for a company that does not have to submit any paper work whatsoever? Although that company uses the labor of the visa holder, they are not the employer, the body shop is the employer.

I stand by my original statement.

Dave

[D.Abramowitz]

"As a H1B holder awaiting my GC"

I hope that more readers than just myself see something wrong with this sentence fragment.

When you speak to the framers of H1-B, and current lawmakers regardless of political party, you will hear the universal refrain that the purpose of H1-B is temporary, and that it is the intent of laws surrounding H1-B to have the H1-B holder "return to their country of origin" upon expiration of the visa.

It was never the intent of the program to provide continual economic gain for the visa holder. H1-B is not an immigration program. That is not a personal opinion. That is the stated purpose of the law.

I have passed the comments of the previous writer to my congressman, and senators, as an example of the egregious abuse of the program, and of the detrimental effect it will invariably have upon American technical workers.

Dave