Who is spoiling H1- Visa image?

[Aaron Raja]

Is that [ company X ] who are hurting image of H1-B Visa?
Thanks
AR

[Ulf Dittmer]

Please note that according to the posting guidelines of this forum, no discussion of specific companies is allowed.

[Aaron Raja]

Foreign Workers' H1B Visa Malpractices Affecting the American Economy

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1482242/foreign_workers_h1b_visa_malpractices.html

[Henry Wong]

Ulf Dittmer wrote:Please note that according to the posting guidelines of this forum, no discussion of specific companies is allowed.

I am not actually sure if a company was actually mentioned -- it looks like that phrase is meant to mean a indian consulting company. Or maybe that phrase does have it's roots to mean a particular company -- don't know.

Henry

[Aaron Raja]

I am just trying to pass the news! I have nothing to do with any company or any national !
IT is regarding job market spoiled by some H1- visa sponsering company!

Thanks
AR

[Ulf Dittmer]

Sorry if that was a generic term. It's a good reminder that this is an international forum, and that terms and phrases that are predominantly used in some regions shouldn't be assumed to be understood by all (so it may be best to avoid or explain them).

[Tim Holloway]

There is no single villain. There are recruiters, both U.S. and international who abuse the system. There are direct employers who abuse the system. People who go to work under H1-B and permit themselves to be exploited are contributing to the abuse of the system.

The system is designed for abuse. In theory, it should be a useful way of supplementing the U.S. labor force by bringing in talent that would otherwise be available and pay them an appropriate wage --- and considering that if you're so short on that talent you have to import it, it should be a premium wage in accordance with the concept of Supply and Demand.

In fact, as we have seen, it has become a means of displacing domestic talent with lower-cost foreign labor because the imported employees are not demanding the level of compensation that would be appropriate if they were truly supplying something that could not be had domestically. The companies doing the sponsoring have the whip hand, since an H1-B who quits or is terminated is under time pressure to accept another position or be evicted. Deadlines make for bad decisions.

As long as H1-B is allowable for commodity labor, expect it to be abused. And as long as it is abused, expect it to have the same poor image that any cheap product has. And by "cheap", I mean as in "it doesn't cost much and is worth even less". As opposed to "value", where you really do get something outstanding for a low price. Value isn't seem to carry much, um, value these days.

[aditee sharma]

The companies doing the sponsoring have the whip hand, since an H1-B who quits or is terminated is under time pressure to accept another position or be evicted

Couldn't have been said in a better way. This is the primary factor behind giving H1B a bad name.
The other factor is that exploitation is relative.More often than not, H1Bs are even more exploited or have fewer opportunities back home.
That's why they are here.

However, I do not agree with the last part if it tends to imply that all H1Bs are low on value (pardon me if it doesn't).
Just like people anywhere on earth, H1Bs have competence varying from low to highest.
Yes, the H1B program was designed to just "fill-in the gap" and by definition, get the best of the lot, but the unscrupulous employers make incompetent people to sneak in and that works to the disadvantage of the deserving ones.

Something needs to be done to take the power away from these unscrupulous employers, even though it will not be an easy task.

[Arvind Mahendra]

I agree with Tim, the blame cannot be pinned on just one entity. But lets also admit one thing: the majority of h1bs are finding employment over there. Indians are just taking as much advantage as possible of the opportunity they are being given. The playing field, unfortunately, is just not leveled for U.S. citizens. Getting a diploma or tech related degree is very inexpensive in India compared to what people in the U.S. have to shell out for college. Things like books etc cost a bomb in the U.S. It seems that the problem has many facets to it with the most crucial one being Govt policy that just isn't terribly concerned about investing and developing its own citizens and corporations that couldn't care less as its always easy to tap into cheaper talent pool offshore.

I dont know if blaming h1bs or even these consulting companies if of any use because although they are contributers to the tarnishing of the image of h1bs- they are also taking advantage what they are legally being allowed to do. With labor laws being abused left and right and no consensus of what constitutes exploitation, these firms have no reason to shed away from that leech like and parasitic culture and embrace concepts like ethics. The body shops are well organized and they will run their con game for as long as they can, as long as they operate in a country that refuses to think long term.

[aditee sharma]

I object to specifically naming a country in the above post.
My boss who is originally from Germany told me the same tale of exploitation that he had to go through when he came on a work visa.

[Tim Holloway]

aditee sharma wrote:

The companies doing the sponsoring have the whip hand, since an H1-B who quits or is terminated is under time pressure to accept another position or be evicted

However, I do not agree with the last part if it tends to imply that all H1Bs are low on value (pardon me if it doesn't).

The question is "who is spoiling the H1 Visa image?".

Bear in mind that while the US is known and occasionally ridiculed for being generous to a fault, the H1-B program is not supposed to be some sort of foreign aid program. It's supposed to fill gaps in the US labor force. If you wanted to be really cynical, you could even take that as plundering other countries for their top talent.

The reason that H1-B has a bad reputation is that it has been used to bring in people who are not exceptional. It doesn't matter if they're bad, good, or excellent, if they're displacing equivalent or better members the native workforce. Nor for that matter, when it's used to displace people who could have been trained with comparatively little effort to fulfill the need.

Charity, after all, begins at home.

I don't buy into the concept of exploited here versus exploited there. Yes, you can make out like a bandit when you are on the favorable side of wage arbitrage. But if you're discounting yourself relative to the local market, you're still being exploited, even if they pay you in sacks of rubies. And you won't be thanked by those who can't likewise discount themselves because they have no cheaper "back home" to retire to.

[aditee sharma]

Well, I only agreed for the most part and quoted the bartender in my post.
The bartender (trying very hard not to use you as per JR policy) did not say that whether he thinks that all or majority of H1Bs are undeserving.
If he thinks like that then I disagree.
Never did I say or intend to imply that H1B is charity.
Just stating the economic reason behind people allowing themselves to get exploited doesn't mean that I am begging anyone.
No Sir, I just got a relatively better reward for my honest endeavor and skills.The latter, I believe some (no generalization) of my home-grown, sons-of-the-soil colleagues do not offer.
Its a potentially peace violating topic. I'd rather steer clear off it depending on the responses it gets.

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:I object to specifically naming a country in the above post. My boss who is originally from Germany told me the same tale of exploitation that he had to go through when he came on a work visa.

What specific exploitation is he referring to? I've known numerous H-1 and L-1 holders (as well as being a former H holder myself) and my own anecdotal experience does not match your boss'. Besides, coming from a nation with similar economic prospects to the US, why would you put up with lousy conditions? The odds of being treated poorly and putting up with it are much lower.

Personally, I'd be in favor of a per-country limit on the H-1.

Cheers!

Luke

[aditee sharma]

What specific exploitation is he referring to?
--To being paid low as compared to the rate his employer commanded from the client.
--To not being able to switch employer because his Green Card has been filed already and he'd have to restart had he changed the employer.
Much of it is similar to the Indian H1B experience.
Now, there may not be that many cases because there are not that many H1Bs from the well-off countries.

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:What specific exploitation is he referring to?
--To being paid low as compared to the rate his employer commanded from the client.

I don't see that as exploitation. That's a basic fact of life in all professional services - and economics in general. If you go through a middleman, then they take a cut, no matter what your immigration status is. And do you think that when you pay an attorney or a doctor $X, that the professional sees it all? Overhead and administrative salaries come out of that too.

--To not being able to switch employer because his Green Card has been filed already and he'd have to restart had he changed the employer.

Again, that's not exploitation. The system takes a bit of time, and it's not like he could avoid it by staying with a "good" employer. To be honest, it's not much different than a contract that says in return for staying for a period of time, one gets certain benefits from one's employer. In this case, a GC. But plenty of US citizens sign such contracts all the time.

Now, there may not be that many cases because there are not that many H1Bs from the well-off countries.

I've suggested in the past (I don't have numbers from the last 2-3 years) that between 40-50% of all H-1Bs are given to citizens of First World nations.

Cheers!

Luke

[aditee sharma]

If you go through a middleman , then they take a cut, no matter what your immigration status is.

There you go. H1Bs have no choice but to go through a middleman, unlike permanent residents and citizens who form their own company and are employed through that as consultants.
I don't know why you think that I would be so naive not to expect the middleman to make something, but its the extent of it that I see a problem with.
Neither do I think that the employers have much to do with GC processing.Often they file it under the slower category deliberately to make a person stick longer, but the process is inherently slow as well. The system has given them undue advantage to control H1Bs.

The dynamics of H1B go much beyond the limits of a job discussion.It has more to do with economics and trade.
Lets stop this discussion right here simply because it does not fall under the purview of any Forum anymore.
However, if you'd like to talk more about it, I am willing to do it on another website.
After all, its not very often that one gets a chance to talk about relevant issues with genuine people interested in having a meaningful discussion.

[Ulf Dittmer]

aditee sharma wrote:H1Bs have no choice but to go through a middleman

Please do not use false absolutes. There are thousands of successful H1B applicants every year who do not use a middle man of any kind.

However, if you'd like to talk more about it, I am willing to do it on another website. After all, its not very often that one gets a chance to talk about relevant issues with genuine people interested in having a meaningful discussion.

I think this discussion is a perfect fit for this forum; why would you want to take it elsewhere?

[aditee sharma]

There are thousands of successful H1B applicants every year who do not use a middle man of any kind.

Middleman is the firm that employees H1Bs. They are supposed to act like true US employers, but their way of doing business makes me call them middlemen.
I think Luke means the same.If not then it only means that my boss said something to make me feel better.

I am okay with discussing this topic here as well, but if the bartenders themselves get carried away and use uncalled for terms like "charity" , it makes me think like this may
not be the right topic to discuss here.
Its not a Job discussion anymore.Its H1B discussion. No problems, though. I am fine if everybody else is fine and as far as we are able to control the adrenalin rush.

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:I think Luke means the same.If not then it only means that my boss said something to make me feel better.

I don't mean the same. I was hired as a direct employee of an insurance company, paid a salary. There were other times when I was doing consulting work on a TN, where again I was paid a salary no matter how much or how little I billed. Ironically, the only times I have been on contract and dealt with a middleman was when I was using an EAD and after I got my Green Card.

Ulf is correct - your statement is a false absolute. I suspect part of the H-1B problem is that middlemen have gained an effective monopoly over the process, due to the incredibly short window that the quota is unfilled.

Its not a Job discussion anymore.Its H1B discussion. No problems, though. I am fine if everybody else is fine and as far as we are able to control the adrenalin rush.

I think H-1Bs, immigration and working conditions are quite relevant to this forum.

Cheers!

Luke

[aditee sharma]

Ulf is correct - your statement is a false absolute. I suspect part of the H-1B problem is that middlemen have gained an effective monopoly over the process, due to the incredibly short window that the quota is unfilled

This is a self-contradicting statement. If Ulf is correct, then how come middlemen have gained effective monopoly?
I takes close to a year (including time to prepare paper work etc.) from the time H1B is initiated to actually start working on it.
Companies do not wait for a whole year to hire any individual.No one is that important.No one can be that important.
That leaves only staffing firms who always have requirements someplace or the other and they file H1Bs in anticipation.
So, it seems I am not the one who is making a "false absolute" statement.

As my boss told me, he did come through a staffing firm aka middlemen.
Later on, he was employed by the same client directly.This is all I know about his work history.
It could be that he said few things to make me feel better (he was a good man. ) , but some of it has to be true.
He wasn't a liar either.

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:This is a self-contradicting statement. If Ulf is correct, then how come middlemen have gained effective monopoly?

It's not self-contradicting at all. There is no legal requirement that H-1B holders go through a middleman. Practically, however, the H-1B program has failed to the point where average American companies are locked out, because unless you know the 36 hours in a year when H-1Bs can be applied for and prepare in advance, then you are essentially locked out of the program.

I takes close to a year (including time to prepare paper work etc.) from the time H1B is initiated to actually start working on it. Companies do not wait for a whole year to hire any individual.No one is that important.No one can be that important. That leaves only staffing firms who always have requirements someplace or the other and they file H1Bs in anticipation.

Exactly.

So, it seems I am not the one who is making a "false absolute" statement.

No, it is a false absolute. There's nothing preventing a company from directly hiring an alien already in H-1B status. They are not subject to the cap, if already counted under it, and can start immediately. So it is technically possible for them to hire someone, but it's rarely done. The interesting question is why this is.

Later on, he was employed by the same client directly.

Exactly. Which means that going through a third party is not required.

Cheers!

Luke

[Gabriel Claramunt]

If you visit the immigration forums around, it seems to be some kind of crackdown into the "middleman", hence making the H1B program a little better.

[aditee sharma]

Luke Kolin wrote:
It's not self-contradicting at all. There is no legal requirement that H-1B holders go through a middleman. Practically, however, the H-1B program has failed to the point where average American companies are locked out, because unless you know the 36 hours in a year when H-1Bs can be applied for and prepare in advance, then you are essentially locked out of the program.

Well, this is again a contradiction.How does this argument change the fact that middlemen have the advantage?
You are disagreeing on the 1st line and then providing evidence to the contrary.

Luke Kolin wrote:
No, it is a false absolute. There's nothing preventing a company from directly hiring an alien already in H-1B status. They are not subject to the cap, if already counted under it, and can start immediately. So it is technically possible for them to hire someone, but it's rarely done. The interesting question is why this is.

If its rarely done by the companies, that again leaves the H1B people with the middlemen.
Hence you are proving the opposite of your assertion.

Luke Kolin wrote:
Exactly. Which means that going through a third party is not required.

You have yourself said above that this is rare.Besides, my Boss joined the client after he got the Permanent Residentship.

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:Hence you are proving the opposite of your assertion.

My assertion is simply that there is no legal requirement that a 3rd party be involved.

Luke

[aditee sharma]

Luke Kolin wrote:
My assertion is simply that there is no legal requirement that a 3rd party be involved.

How does it change the fact that in actual practice Middlemen have an advantage(our point of discussion)?
And in light of the facts (some stated by yourself) how is it "false absolute" to say that the majority of H1Bs have to go through the middlemen?

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:How does it change the fact that in actual practice Middlemen have an advantage(our point of discussion)?

I don't recall ever discussing that point.

And in light of the facts (some stated by yourself) how is it "false absolute" to say that the majority of H1Bs have to go through the middlemen?

I don't recall you ever making that point. You said that H-1B holders had "no choice", whereas it was pointed out that many do not. Whether that number encompasses the majority of H-1Bs or not is not something I have commented on, or can comment on.

Luke

[Gabriel Claramunt]

aditee sharma wrote:

Luke Kolin wrote:
My assertion is simply that there is no legal requirement that a 3rd party be involved.

How does it change the fact that in actual practice Middlemen have an advantage(our point of discussion)?
And in light of the facts (some stated by yourself) how is it "false absolute" to say that the majority of H1Bs have to go through the middlemen?

If you look at the statistics, the major users of H1B visas are the major indian consulting firms and the biggest software producers in US, hardly "middleman". And thinking that the middleman had advantage over the established companies is a self fulfilling prophecy: the middleman have candidates because people go through them, if people wait for a genuine offer, the quota wont be filled by middleman only...

[aditee sharma]

Luke Kolin wrote:
I don't recall ever discussing that point.

Well, then how do we discuss if you deny what happened?

Luke Kolin wrote:
I don't recall you ever making that point. You said that H-1B holders had "no choice", whereas it was pointed out that many do not. Whether that number encompasses the majority of H-1Bs or not is not something I have commented on, or can comment on.

All or majority...does it really make that much difference?
Exceptions prove the rule.
Ok, I give you that if your purpose is to win an argument. The majority goes through the middlemen except a few.
His name is Ashoka and he's from Bangalore . Does that make you feel better?

[Luke Kolin]

aditee sharma wrote:
Well, then how do we discuss if you deny what happened?

I'm not denying anything. If I have said differently, please quote me. Otherwise our discussion is complete.

Luke

[aditee sharma]

Gabriel Claramunt wrote:
If you look at the statistics, the major users of H1B visas are the major indian consulting firms and the biggest software producers in US, hardly "middleman".

Major indian consulting firms are the middlemen.They provide software manpower for the US based companies in finance, brick and mortar and other sectors.

Gabriel Claramunt wrote:
And thinking that the middleman had advantage over the established companies is a self fulfilling prophecy: the middleman have candidates because people go through them, if people wait for a genuine offer, the quota wont be filled by middleman only...

Please provide statistics to show how many offers do the US companies give to people sitting in India ?
Your statement is what deserves to be labeled false absolute, not mine.
It has been stated already that no US company waits between the time H1 applications are accepted and the time one actually gets to start working.It is justified on their part because the companies can not halt business if the process is so slow. So, enters the middleman.

[aditee sharma]

Luke Kolin wrote:
I'm not denying anything. If I have said differently, please quote me. Otherwise our discussion is complete.
Luke

Your wish is my command. Look at the bold. Check mate :

Luke Kolin wrote: There is no legal requirement that H-1B holders go through a middleman. Practically, however, the H-1B program has failed to the point where average American companies are locked out, because unless you know the 36 hours in a year when H-1Bs can be applied for and prepare in advance, then you are essentially locked out of the program.

This implies that other than middlemen, there are not many alternatives.

[William Thomas]

The company i work for, which i wont mention as its apparently against the rules, has been exploiting the H1B visa program for the past few years.

It pays its foreign consultants prevailing wages, or at least reasonably close to it, the friends ive made from india for example, have told me that back home they would make 4-5 dollars an hour, but in the states make 20. They did say the cost of living takes a big chunk out of it, but its still considerably more.

So technically the company is following the law. However, its not using H1B personnel to supplement the work force, it brings them here to take U.S. jobs. The people who are being laid off are required as part of their severance to train the H1B guest that is going to take their job back to their country of origin.

its clear that the H1B visa program was started out as a program to help companies fill a labor shortage. its now being exploited on many fronts, and i hope that the government rewrites the program before the U.S. economy slips much further. I know this means less money in some foreign workers pockets, but if the U.S. economy falls, the effects will hit all economies, unfortunately.

[Gabriel Claramunt]

I got the statistics from the article in wikipedia and from InformationWeek
By "middleman" I refer to what is know as "shadi desi consulting firms", the ones that are being cracked down by USCIS (the ones that doesn't pay when they don't have a project, make the employees pay for the visa, make fakes resumes, etc). If you see the list, you have TCS, Infosys, and Wipro, but also IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle, Although I agree that the big indian companies somewhat take advatage of the H1B program, is different than breaking the law.
Why a US company must give offers to people sitting in India? They have no obligation to do so!
Let me tell you: some US companies ARE willing to wait 6 months to get the right person onboard, is hard but is not impossible.

[aditee sharma]

William Thomas wrote:
its clear that the H1B visa program was started out as a program to help companies fill a labor shortage. its now being exploited on many fronts, and i hope that the government rewrites the program before the U.S. economy slips much further. I know this means less money in some foreign workers pockets, but if the U.S. economy falls, the effects will hit all economies, unfortunately.

I've never debated the abuse of H1B visa program.And never in my life can I wish to snatch the job away from a equally competent fellow colleague from a country like US that has given me everything, including values and the virtue of being just.
What I am against is the generalization. It is not true that all H1Bs are fake and that all H1Bs are replacing equally or more competent workers.
It is this insinuation that is a false absolute.
If there are some fake cases, then there are equal no. of cases like some US people not even having a college degree and still being preferred for employment over Engineering Graduates from the foreign countries. There has to be a limit on how much one can stifle competition with a "Sons-of-the soil first" approach that masquerades as "All H1Bs are fake" sloganeering.
I understand that is difficult to explain to people constrained by a bad economy and fear of losing their jobs.
I take it in my stride and will always be thankful to America, even if I am made to pack my bags and go back.
Not out of being "charitable", but because America truly deserves the admiration.

[aditee sharma]

Gabriel Claramunt wrote:If you see the list, you have TCS, Infosys, and Wipro, but also IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle, Although I agree that the big indian companies somewhat take advatage of the H1B program, is different than breaking the law.

It is against JR policy to take names. [removed opinion about these companies--MH]
Get your facts right please.There is a class action suit filed against one of them for filing the tax return on behalf of their employees and then keeping their tax refund.

Gabriel Claramunt wrote:Why a US company must give offers to people sitting in India? They have no obligation to do so!

This is in contradiction to your earlier statement:

Gabriel Claramunt wrote:
... the middleman have candidates because people go through them, if people wait for a genuine offer, the quota wont be filled by middleman only...

Correct that US companies have no obligation to go to India, but then how will not going to the middlemen and just waiting get them the jobs?

[Luke Kolin]

Never mind.

Luke

[Gabriel Claramunt]

Yes, we seem to be arguing the same point...

[Mark Herschberg]

Some clarifications...

aditee sharma wrote:]
(trying very hard not to use you as per JR policy)

We don't have any policies against using the word "you" or referring to someone. We do want discussions to debate ideas and not to make personal attacks, but that doesn't preclude the use of the word "you."

aditee sharma wrote:
It is against JR policy to take names.

There is no rule against using company names (which is I believe what you meant by "take names"). There is only a rule against discussing opinions of those companies. For example, stating "Acme laid of 45,000 workers" is pretty objective and allowed. Saying "Acme betrays their workers" is an opinion and is not allowed. That certain companies use H1B's is objective and allowed. Suggesting that companies engage in illegal activities and don't get caught, without providing objective third party evidence is an opinion and not allowed.


--Mark

[aditee sharma]

Mark Herschberg wrote: Suggesting that companies engage in illegal activities and don't get caught, without providing objective third party evidence is an opinion and not allowed.

I don't want to get into possible legal troubles irrespective of how much substantial evidence there is, or how much JR protects such statements.
If anybody is really keen to find out about the class action suit, its not difficult to google for one of the companies named in Gabriel's post.

[Mark Herschberg]

aditee sharma wrote:
I don't want to get into possible legal troubles irrespective of how much substantial evidence there is, or how much JR protects such statements.
If anybody is really keen to find out about the class action suit, its not difficult to google for one of the companies named in Gabriel's post.

Let me clarify again. Objective statements are allowed, opinions are not. If there is a pending lawsuit against a company, that can certainly be mentioned (sourced should be cited of course). Opinions that "companies are getting away with illegal activities" are not allowed; an investigative news report that companies are not being prosecuted for illegal activities would be allowed.

In general however, this board doesn't want to get into discussions of individuals companies. If you're trying to make a point and objective information about a company illustrates that point, then feel free to use it. But we're trying to avoid discussions about individual companies here as that's not the point of this forum.

--Mark