The Hypocrisy of Helping the Poor?

[quote]
Bay wrote:
Paul Theroux is a great travel writer; I’ve read a couple of his books. I wish he had touched upon the impact of immigration on America’s poor, as it is also related to their plight and is often driven by corporate ambitions. /quote
There appears to be two sides of the problems or changes due to globalization (for good or for bad, depending on what situation you are in.)

One is touched on by Paul Theroux’s article: shipping the jobs out of a country. The other is hinted by Bay as quoted above: Bring in immigrants as labors (or “talents” in the post-industrial world, using the word either labors or talents depending on who say this and what their needs/wants are) to fulfill the need of corporations. (which may or may not always be aligned with the citizens’ need.)

Another related issue is the capital and the gain/loss of capitals: how to deal with their flow into/out of the country and what their implications (taxes, incentives for the potential of job creations, etc.)

These are all big and complicated issues. But the other day, a coworker asked a simple question:

Suppose that person A in the US spends a fortune to get an engineering degree and person B outside of US spends a small fraction of what person A spends but still gets an engineering degree from a college out of the US. If a US corporation treats these two graduates equally (assuming that they take a written test they get the same score), is it fair?

Person A may have accumulated a lot of student loans because of the high college cost here, but person B may not have any debt.

What could be “worse” is that, quite often, the person B may be from a family who may have more financial resources, in his/her country of origin at least, so before college, person B may even have received a better K-12 education than person A may have.

I have met a person B who drives a car costing 40K as his first car in US. This could tell you what kind of background he comes from. He is like 24 yo only and has a quite average income for his age in this field. The starting point between person A and B could be very unequal.

And there could be a lot of persons like person B coming in, in the next decade or two.

This is why, in principle, work visas are only handed out to foreign nationals for jobs in which there are insufficient numbers of citizens to fill the position. But companies like Disney pervert this:

Displaced Disney Cast Member: How They Replaced Me, Other Americans, With Cheap Foreigners On H1B Visas
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/07/exclusive-displaced-cast-member-how-disney-replaced-me-other-americans-with-cheap-foreigners-on-h1b-visas/

Haha…these were almost the exact words (except it was 30 days instead of 90 days for the majority of us) that our manager used when he was asked by his upper manager to tell all members in our group. The only difference is that he said he himself would be let go at the same time as all of us.

Actually, when everyone has the same fate, most of us did not feel very bad. Maybe this is the new trend for the management to do this kind of thing.

Another trend (maybe it has been like this for a while) seems to be that executives would be offered some golden parachutes when they were hired.

Occasionally, some of them even prefer that the company could become so bad (but not too bad so that the company is closed altogether) that they would have a chance of being replaced by others and then exercising their rights for these golden parachutes.

I heard of a story that an executive got this kind of deal and he went out to buy an expensive car the next day in order to celebrate the luck of receiving the good fortune. I also heard that during a change of the ownership at another company, all executives (CEOs and all VPs except one) chose the golden parachutes.

Unless they go to jail (almost never), the CEO’s never seem to lose.

“And there could be a lot of persons like person B coming in, in the next decade or two.” (meaning foreign visa holders).

It already has happened, I have had openings in my group (IT based), and resumes we see are mostly Indian, some from Eastern Europe, some from the rest of southeast Asia, and China with a handful of people born in the US. Most of them got here on the H1b visa (many of them still were), and they worked for the outsourcing consulting firms, or places like Accenture. These aren’t people with special skills, many of the schools they came from are basically glorified trade schools (I am not talking a place like IIT, which is a top tier school), but the H1B has allowed them to come into the US. And it was basically because they are low wage labor, what happened is very much a self fulfilling prophesy, corporations, claiming ‘shortages’, were allowed to change the H1B from being specialized skills (like a phd in solid state physics, where things are rare), to being for things like Java programming, DBA’s, QA, etc, and it drove down wages (Harvard Business Review, not exactly Mother Jones News, did a big study on it and said that most of the Visa hiring was for cheaper costs). Companies claimed these were highly skilled jobs, but they aren’t, many of those hired under this are drones, doing routine tasks, not talking rocket scientists. As a result, kids saw this, and realized they didn’t want to compete against third world labor prices, and went into other things, so the supply of US kids going into tech dropped, then we hear "shortages’, with the last immigration bill the Obama administration tried doubling the number of H1B visas allowed each year. I can tell you as a hiring manager that many of these wondering hands, after 7 or 8 years of experience, make a lot less than an experienced worker word and quite frankly, are probably worth what they cost, they have been relatively cheap labor to start and generally remain that way, and those running the groups are told to make do with what they get, rather than paying for more talented employees.

A lot of the outsourcing and the like is searching for cheap labor, basically what industry wants is to get labor as cheap as possible, and now that is global. Mills that were established in NE were to a large extend based on immigrant labor willing to work cheaply, as were the steel industry, once those industries unionized the mills moved down South to places that were non union and a lot cheaper in costs for them. When the east opened up, Mills started moving to Bengladesh, Thailand, India, and then into China, because labor costs were extremely low, and even with shipping costs, was a major cost reduction (it amazes me you buy something with a name label on it, like Ralph Lauren, Donna Karan and the rest, and it as made in some sweatshop in Bengladesh or the Phillipines). These days, because costs have gone up in China, the companies are opening factories in Vietnam (often moving in Chinese workers from rural areas at cheap wages), and into places like Africa.

Okay, so then why did the Japanese and Korean and European companies move their production to the US? The answer is that it was economically advantageous to do so, and it isn’t just labor costs (with BMW and Mercedes, it is, union workers in Germany make relatively high wages, plus the work rules are very stiff). The wages being paid in the transplants are not starvation wages, they might be less than what someone could have made in Detroit, but they are decent.One of the reasons is economic incentives that the regions give, with taxes. For the transplants down in Kentucky and Tennessee, they benefit from federal power from the TVA, that is sold at cost, and is about 50-65% cheaper than power from private power plants. The regions have good transportation, from truck and rail, so they can get supplies, and suppliers are located in the region as well (my Camry, made in Kentucky, was 80% sourced from parts in the US). The other thing it does is insulate them from currency fluctuations, if they build in the US, use parts from the US, currency fluctuations won’t make the cost skyrocket if the dollar goes weak. They also don’t have transportation costs and the bothers of tariffs, either.

The other reason is political, when you are an export only country, like Japan before they started moving production here, you get called what the Chinese are today, job stealers, exploiters of stupid US trade policy and the like. It also is the mindset of those running the companies, Toyota, Hyundai, BMW, VW, Honda and Nissan et al don’t think of themselves as ‘Japanese’ or “German” any more, they are global companies producing for local markets. Unlike China and India, these are developed countries who have internal economic demand that drives their economies, they don’t depend on exports and taking jobs from other countries to drive their economic growth (take a look at China, whose economy is spluttering, their answer was the devalue the Yuan, to make exports even cheaper; in a developed country they would be trying to do things to stimulate internal demand). One thing these companies realize is something that Henry Ford knew in the 1920’s (and was laughingly called a ‘socialist’ for it), that by locating in the US, they are building goods that the people on the assembly line can afford for the most part, those toyotas, hondas, Nissans and so forth are affordable (being luxury brands, BMW may not be, maybe the 3 series, MB probably not). The people on those lines can build their products and afford them, something you can’t say for a typical Indian and Chinese manufacturing worker, who can’t, few if any of the people assembling Apple products can afford them (they buy cheap knockoffs that flourish in China), those working on Chinese car company lines can’t afford them, the cars are sold to the middle class and upper classes, who usually have ties to the government or work for government de facto tied companies. Once upon a time Korea and Japan were low cost providers, but they also realized they needed to build up their own internal demand and they also needed to have demand in other countries, which taking jobs and giving them to low cost labor wouldn’t work in the long run.

There does appear to be two distinct types of H1-B workers. One is the kind the visa was meant for, which is high end talent, typically working directly for a company doing some kind of advanced work. The other is the kind of low end outsource labor at companies that sell the labor to other companies who lay off their own employees. The latter appear to be the ones hogging the visas, leaving few for the former, who complain about it.

The most useful reform would be to disallow H1-B visas to outsourcing companies. Then there would be plenty for top end talent working directly at companies.

@ucb:
I believe they reclassified the H1B visa for unusual skills to another designation completely, to allow them to use the H1B for ordinary jobs. When I started working, with the H1B visa, you had to prove that the person’s skill set was not commonly available, you had to advertise for the position, and it had to pay what was commonly paid for someone with that skill set. These days, that isn’t true, the H1B isn’t about unique skills, that is for sure, and many of them are owned by firms like Infosys and Wipro, and they are routinely granted, and they let the companies say what the prevailing wages are. You are correct in one thing, thanks to the anti immigrant fervor after 9/11, students who come to US schools for advanced degrees in needed fields like computer science, engineering and science have a next to impossible time getting a work visa to stay in the US, while they allow a flood of H1b’s from overseas who are not special labor, just cheap, mostly from schools that are not much better than a trade school here.

With Zuckerberg’s billions, can’t he fund the education of US residents to qualify them for the jobs he claims he needs the visas for?

He did donate 18 million Facebook shares (worth about 500 million at the time) to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation and also funded some education reform in Newark, NJ.

I heard that the ones who got the degrees in the US still have a better shot of getting an H1B (as long as they find a job in a genuine US company.) Some says (I can not verify it though) that those “H1B sweatshop type” companies really do not want to hire these applicants - they do not want to hire US citizens or permanent residents either (harder to manage the “expectations” of those who do not have a legal issue regarding whether they can stay?) However, those who have never set their foot on US before they get their H1Bs (therefore they have never got a degree here in US) get most of the H1B slots with the helps from such outsource companies that were mentioned here. How can they get more H1B slots even though the odds is against them? By having a sheer number of applicants. When the total number of applicants is huge, the absolute number of those who win the lottery (yes, I heard it is really a lottery system) will still be large. It rumors that some of them may play a shady trick like having one person applying multiple times with a slight variation of their names in order to increase their odds of “winning the lottery.” But I personally only heard of this but it is a “rumor quality” hearsay here.

I bet the majority of the tenants in the apartment complex I live now are likely H1Bs. Many of them actually work for the tier-one or tier-two companies(not sure if they are directly hired by these companies, or indirectly via these outsource companies and these companies then “drop them into these tier-one or two companies.”

It is a very interesting scene when some company here essentially consists of two “parallel companies” with two parallel but different management reporting structure and these two groups of engineers on the same project, and they sit next to each other. Whenever a new employee joins a company, one of the first questions could be: which side of the company hires you? It was not like this just a few decades ago.

I’m not sure that is true. My daughter knows a PhD candidate from France and he got an internship this summer.

Which part is not true? What I wrote or what musicprnt wrote? I am curious because I am not sure about all of these either.

What I was trying to say is that the following part written by musicprn could be not true:

“students who come to US schools for advanced degrees in needed fields like computer science, engineering and science have a next to impossible time getting a work visa to stay in the US.”

Our company hired some PhDs recently also. Most of them really do not have access to very “good” projects as the old timers hold on to critical projects with an iron wrist, and the new comers really need a good luck to land on a longer term project no matter how good they are.

The quote about next to impossible to get work visa.

Thanks for clarifications.

I recently heard that all H1B applicants at our company (who all have gotten their degrees in US) receives H1Bs. The success rate is 100%! But this success rate is for those who have the US degrees. It just takes time. Occasionally, some with a foreign degree (like from
UK, Canada, but not from those countries who are not considered ad "advanced countries.) may receive H1Bs also, even from a company like Apple (which takes a lot of H1Bs.)

If it is next to impossible to get a work visa, many graduate schools in the US will have a harder time to recruit their students.

I the the undergrads may have a hard time but not the graduate students.

@DrGoogle

Can you comment? Is there a shortage of domestic IT workers to staff Silicon Valley, which necessitates bringing in foreign workers on H1Bs?

Most H1-B visa holders I have encountered (at regular companies where they were working directly for the company, not outsourcing companies) have graduate degrees from US universities. This makes sense, since they are actually among the elite students of their home countries who were able to be admitted to funded graduate programs in US universities (being funded is the only way most international students can study at US universities).

However, the outsourcing companies presumably hire from another lower qualification pool where they may much less (and where the pay rates are comparable to the market for such lower qualification people so that they can state that on their H1-B sponsorship paperwork). Take a look at this table: http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2015-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx . Notice that most of the obvious outsourcing companies (including the top 10 H1-B visa employers for 2015) have average pay levels in the $60,000s to $80,000s, though a few higher end ones (Deloitte Consulting, NTT Data) reach into the $100,000s. However, those companies hiring directly for their own work (#11, #13, #14, #18, #19, #20, #21, #24) have average pay significantly higher than the outsourcing company range ($100,000s to $130,000s).

@GMTplus7, I do not really know. Only know of one case because my daughter went water rafting with him.

My company just hired 2 new international graduates (MS degree) under the OPT provision. They don’t have the H1B status yet but they are hopeful.