In a message dated 3/18/08 6:16:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, matloff@cs.ucdavis.edu writes:
To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter 112
Enclosed below is an excellent blog by Computerworld report Patrick
Thibodeau, listing five reasons why Congress will raise the H-1B cap,
and boy, did he nail it. He even correctly noted that the opponents of
the H-1B program can't count on IEEE-USA, a putative H-1B-critic.
We still don't know what will happen in Congress, but there are now two
new bills to expand H-1B, and I think Thibodeau's analysis is right on
the mark. However, I must add a few reasons to his list:
Reason 6: Congress won't see through Bill Gates' misleading testimony.
Gates has an aura, certainly not deserved in the view of many of us
techies who eschew his software (I'm a longtime Linux user), but
definitely effective on Capitol Hill, which is populated largely by
gullible technophobes. Yet you don't have to know a byte from a bite to
see that Microsoft has been outrageously untruthful. Consider for
example the following:
* Microsoft claims they need H-1B to keep jobs in the U.S., and only
resort to offshoring if they can't find workers here. Yet in an
internal presentation made to managers, Microsoft said, "Pick
something to move offshore today."
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/MicrosoftClaimBelied.txt
* Microsoft claims they can't hire developers, yet they asked their
contractors to take a week's furlough to save money.
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/MicrosoftClaimBeliedMore.txt
* Microsoft admitted that most of the developers it hires are young.
As I've often mentioned, it is not generally understood, even by
critics of the H-1B program, that H-1B is largely used as a way to
avoid hiring the older (age 35 or 40) American workers.
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/MicrosoftLetsTruthSlipOut.txt
* Microsoft salaries aren't keeping up with inflation. What kind
of "labor shortage" produces declining wages, I ask you?
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/MicrosoftSalaries.txt
It's not just Microsoft that is deceiving the public. The entire tech
industry is just as culpable, continuing to insist that the U.S.
educational system just isn't producing enough techies.
The data show otherwise. The recent Urban Institute study demonstrated
that we are producing more than enough STEM (science, technology,
engineering and math) graduates for our economy (see my report at
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/UrbanInst2.txt). Starting
salaries have been flat or falling. I've show such data before, and one
of my readers points out the latest, noting that
From the National Association of Colleges and Employers website --
The starting salaries for college grads in 2001:
http://www.naceweb.org/press/display.asp?year=2007&prid=111
The starting salaries for college grads in 2007:
http://www.naceweb.org/press/display.asp?year=2007&prid=264
The starting salary for computer science grads was $52,473 in 2001
and $53,051 in 2007. Inflation for this time period has been about 16%
but yet the starting salary for computer science grads only increased by
1%.
The educational system itself is happy to chime in to agree with the
industry claims, as they want to get donations from industry too, and
want to leverage the "labor shortage" into more funding for schools and
universities. Last week the Dean of Engineering at CSUS told the
student newspaper that employers are desperate to hire (http://media.www.
statehornet.com/media/storage/paper1146/news/2008/03/12/News/Fair-To.
Train.Engineers.Fill.State.Employment.Gap-3263699.shtml). The good
dean is quoted as saying "When I meet with representatives of industry
, they are not asking for engineers - they are yelling for them." Yet
the listings at CSUS' Engineering/Computer Science placement office
are meager, at least in the computer fields; other than a listing
from Accenture, and a few civil service job openings (most of which
will likely be canceled due to the California budget crisis), there's
basically almost nothing there.
Last week one of my best students told me that Cisco had just informed
him that the firm would not be hiring any interns from UC Davis this
year, down from 14 last year. Apparently the firm is tightening their
belts even at the intern level.
Reason 7: Congress doesn't want to know these truths anyway, as
they don't want to jeopardize the lavish campaign contributions Congress
receives from the tech industry.
Recall that the last time Congress raised the H-1B cap, there were
explicit public statements by politicians stating the Congress enacted
the increase solely to get campaign money. Sen. Robert Bennett (R-Utah)
remarked, "Once it's clear (the visa bill) is going to get through,
everybody signs up so nobody can be in the position of being accused of
being against high tech. There were, in fact, a whole lot of folks
against it, but because they are tapping the high-tech community for
campaign contributions, they don't want to admit that in public."
(Carolyn Lochhead, Bill to Boost Tech Visas Sails Through Congress:
Clinton Expected to Sign Popular Measure, San Francisco Chronicle,
October 4, 2000.) A major supporter of pending legislation which would
increase the H-1B quota, Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), said, "This is not a
popular bill with the public. It's popular with the CEOs...This is a
very important issue for the high-tech executives who give the money."
(Committee To Address Bill Eliminating H-1B Cap, National Journal
Technology Daily, May 5, 2000 and Lars-Erik Nelson, Pols Are Going
Overboard On Visa Program, New York Daily News, May 3, 2000.) Rep.
Davis was chair of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee.
Reason 8: The Programmers Guild and many other critics of the H-1B
program are diluting whatever influence they have (which Thibodeau
correctly points out is limited compared to the huge clout wielded by
the tech industry) by focusing on the second-sourcing issue (in which a
firm hires H-1Bs and then rents them out to other firms).
This is basically a nonissue. if those firms disappeared tomorrow, their
clients such as Microsoft would take up the slack and hire more H-1Bs
directly. Worse, PG and the others are thereby giving Congress an
opening in which Congress could make some sort of restriction
that appears to ban second-sourcing and thus claim to have made
concessions to PG while actually not liberating any jobs for U.S.
citizens and permanent residents at all, both because the restriction
would be cosmetic and because, as I said, even with genuine restrictions
the current clients of the body shops would simply hire more H-1Bs
directly.
The remarks at the end of Thibodeau's blog include some from H-1Bs
themselves, notably this one:
No, you need us to fix economy
Submitted by Anonymous on March 16, 2008 - 11:10 A.M.
No, you need us to fix economy. USA citizens have made a mess of the
economy. I hope these legislations have large increases in the green card
quotas. If enough of hi-skill H1 pros can get our green cards, then we can
fix your mess. Whiners who complain about H1 and green card programmes need
to quit IT and go work Wal-mart, you unproductive ones will be laid off soon
anyway :)
As this one speaks for itself, I won't comment, but I must say that I've
seen messianic attitudes like this quite a bit among H-1Bs. What they
don't realize is that when THEY hit age 35 or 40, they will be displaced
too.
Norm
http://blogs.computerworld.com/five_reasons_why_the_h_1b_visa_cap_will_increase
Patrick Thibodeau
March 15, 2008 - 3:36 P.M.
Five reasons why the H-1B visa cap will increase
Two bills were introduced this week to raise the H-1B visa cap. They follow
Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates' visit to Washington and his push for a
H-1B cap increase. The opposition faces a daunting task in challenging the
push to increase the H-1B visa.
H-1B proponents in Congress acted quickly to take advantage Gates brought to
the issue. U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) introduced legislation Friday
that would retroactively increase the 2008 visa cap to 195,000, as well as
set that level for the fiscal year, 2009, that begins Oct. 1. Gabrielle
Giffords (D-Arz.) introduced legislation the same week to increase the cap
to 130,000 a year. The current cap is set at 65,000, with an additional
20,000 for holders of advance degrees.
Here are five reason why opponents face a very difficult, if not impossible
task, in stopping a visa cap hike:
One: H-1B opponents have no clout
If H-1B visas weren’t part of the larger immigration reform issue in
Congress, the H-1B cap would have been increased long ago. The opponents
have been piggybacking on the broader immigration debate and they know it.
But the H-1B opposition is in decline even as the debate grows more intense.
Five years ago, tech workers in Connecticut – many working or connected to
the financial services industry (the first industry to really embrace
offshoring) – organized a lobbying group, the Organization for the Rights of
American Workers (TORAW). By 2003, Connecticut's congressional reps had
introduced several bills – all affecting the H-1B issue. The legislation
went nowhere, but Connecticut tech workers proved that an organized effort
can have impact. It’s all part of history now. TORAW has disbanded, out of
money and members. The broader base of opponents are alert, well connected
and can fire off thoughtful, well researched emails to lawmakers at an
instant, but TORAW is illustrative of the anemic state of the opposition.
Opponents lack lobbying muscle in Washington.
Two: The Gates effect
Bill Gates is, obviously, a powerful proponent of the H-1B visa. But where
is the opposition’s star power? Lou Dobbs isn’t it. The Programmers Guild
has been effective in raising issues, but the real heavy weight
organization, with true lobbying ability, is the IEEE-USA, and it has scaled
back its opposition to H-1B visas. This group has staked out a position
focused on visa reform and improving access to permanent residency, the
Green Cards. The IEEE-USA was once more direct about the impact of the H-1B
visa: In 2004, when the cap was scaled back to 65,000 the IEEE-USA pointed
out: The number of unemployed U.S. high-tech professionals dropped sharply
from the first quarter of 2004 to the third quarter. The decline mirrors the
reinstatement of the H-1B visa cap to its historical level of 65,000 in
Fiscal Year 2004 from 195,000 in FY 03. That was a strong message to send to
Congress. But the IEEE-USA also represents many academic institutions that
depend on the H-1B visas. Although universities are exempted from the cap,
foreign enrollments may suffer if students feel they have little chance of
remaining in the U.S. longterm. Universities also have strong ties to tech
companies. It is probably safe to say that the IEEE-USA, as an organization,
is getting pulled in different directions.
Three: There is grass root support for the H-1B visa
A major use of H-1B visas is to help facilitate offshore outsourcing and
even in this downturn outsourcing will continue to grow. That’s the broad
outlook by industry analysts. The pressure for visas remains, even in a
downturn. But the H-1B visa has a very broad, grass root constituency that
extends beyond the tech sector. In the 2007 fiscal year, nearly 20,000
companies, academic institutions, hospitals, public schools and others
received only one H-1B visa. These organizations send emails as well.
Four: The H-1B lottery is a big problem for tech firms
The forecasted demand for H-1B visas is going to force the U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Service (USCIS) to hand out visas via a random lottery for
the fiscal year 2009 that starts Oct 1. For the 2008 fiscal year, the USCIS
received more than 123,000 visa petitions in two days for the 65,000 cap.
Despite that number, the odds were still good that a petition would be
approved in its lottery. The USCIS put all those visa petitions in a hat and
selected about 100,000, rejecting the rest. The selection process works like
college admission: The USCIS accepts more petitions then it has slots and
expects a certain number of these applications to be withdrawn or
disqualified. But this year there seems to be broad consensus that the
number of visa petitions will exceed last year's total, and companies may
face visa odds of two-to-one or higher. This makes the outlook for getting a
visa very unpredictable and unacceptable to tech groups, which are now
pushing for a cap increase with special urgency. But here is an important
point to keep in mind: The people who receive visas under the 65,000 cap are
more likely to only have a bachelor degree. They are the worker bees. The
U.S. has a separate H-1B visa cap of 20,000 for foreign nationals who
graduate with advance degrees from U.S. universities. But there was no
lottery for these graduates because there was no sudden rush in demand. The
USCIS filled those petitions on a first-come, first serve basis until April
30 that year. That may change this year.
Five: Congressional support for visa
Lawmakers have moved the cap up and down before and they will do it again.
Congress will increase the cap this year or next and may make it retroactive
as well. Had an immigration bill been approved last year the cap would have
been 115,000. The open question is whether the H-1B visa will be reformed as
part of a cap increase. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
last year pushed for a reform that set a limit on how the visa is used. One
rule set a limit that no more than 50 percent of the U.S.-based employees at
a company using H-1B workers can be visa holders. It was a measure aimed at
making the India offshore firms a little less nimble and raising it as a
trade issue for India.
----- End forwarded message -----