backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 143 comment(s) - last by hashish2020.. on Mar 13 at 3:35 AM
Company says its job cuts are unbiased and will be based on necessity and performance

After missing its earnings forecasts, Microsoft was forced to make job cuts -- 5,000 to be exact --- to placate shareholders.  The discussion has turned increasingly ugly in past weeks. 

First, Sen. Charles Grassley, a senior Republican Senator from Iowa, where Microsoft has a significant presence, wrote the company and suggested that they lay off foreigners before Americans.  Then Microsoft revealed that it had paid its fired employees too much severance pay and wanted them to return part of their severance checks.  It at last relented after a series of scathing reports in online and print news.

Now Microsoft is back to talking about its job cuts and is taking another controversial stance.  It is defying Sen. Grassley's request and has released a statement to the Senator and the public, informing them that the cuts will be entirely unbiased.

While Microsoft will cut approximately 5 percent of its workforce, it says its number of foreign workers on H1-B visas will remain approximately the same.  Microsoft General Counsel Bradford Smith writes, "We do not expect to see a significant change in the proportion of H-1B employees in our workforce following the job reductions.  The potential to tap into the world's best minds has long been essential to our success."

Sen. Grassley has already gone on record to state his dissatisfaction with Microsoft response.  He states, "I'm still left without much information about how Microsoft is ensuring American workers are being protected or specifics of its H-1B visa hiring practices."

In Mr. Smith's letter, he says that approximately 15 percent of Microsoft's workforce consists of H-1B employees -- this, and his previous comments seem to indicate that most of the cuts will be coming from Microsoft's American employees.

Microsoft has long championed the H1-B visa program.  It has consistently urged Congress to rethink the H1-B limits and allow more foreign workers into America.  It says that its H1-B workers are a key to its success.

While Microsoft is firing some workers, it is also hiring others, so it says the net impact will only be 2,000 to 3,000 fewer jobs.

While Microsoft's letter certainly provides an enlightening response on the cuts, it falls short of the detailed breakdown of how many H1-B jobs were being cut versus jobs of American citizens, which Sen. Grassley demanded of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer.  Senator Grassley is the ranking Republican member of the Senate Finance Committee.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Sooo?
By afkrotch on 3/5/2009 9:23:06 AM , Rating: 5
I prefer the unbiased stance. If a foreign employee is more qualified for the position, then by all means keep the employee and get rid of the less qualified American. Reverse it and I'm okay with that too.

I'd prefer them look at their qualifications and their work ethics. That should determine who you keep, as opposed to "they're foreign, get rid of them."

Maybe the Americans need to stop trying to get handouts and work on bettering themselves, so they can secure their work position.

Now if Microsoft is keeping the foreigners just because they're salaries are cheaper, not for their qualifications/etc, then I'd say Microsoft is in the wrong.

My personal assumption is that Microsoft spent a lot of money to bring the foreigners over and don't want to get rid of them because of that.




RE: Sooo?
By CurtOien on 3/5/2009 9:26:04 AM , Rating: 3
Microsoft must keep the best minds here or all the jobs will go elsewhere.


RE: Sooo?
By saiga6360 on 3/5/2009 9:31:18 AM , Rating: 5
Can we lay off government official for making stupid demands like this?


RE: Sooo?
By noxipoo on 3/5/2009 9:52:17 AM , Rating: 2
yeah, vote next time.


RE: Sooo?
By saiga6360 on 3/5/2009 9:56:28 AM , Rating: 2
Tell that to that Iowans.


RE: Sooo?
By Alpha4 on 3/6/2009 12:32:11 PM , Rating: 2
Does Iowa have a low ratio of eligible voters to people who actually vote? I'm not from the U.S. but I am intrigued. What could make one state do that and not others?


RE: Sooo?
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 7:37:31 PM , Rating: 3
The H-1B program in Iowa is no different than it is in the other 49 states. Sen. Grassley has been a proponent of tightening requirements for US companies petioning for H-1Bs. In 2007 Microsoft petitioned the US Government for 959 H-1Bs ranking in the top five of all H-1B petitioners. In 2008, Microsoft lobbied the US Congress for more H-1B visas.

The purpose of the H-1B visa program is to assist companies in their employment needs where there is not a sufficient American workforce to meet their technology expertise requirements. However, H-1B and other work visa programs were never intended to replace qualified American workers.


RE: Sooo?
By Staples on 3/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Sooo?
By afkrotch on 3/5/2009 12:02:48 PM , Rating: 3
I'm more inclined to think that Microsoft paid a lot of money to bring the foreigners over, but at the same time, they also receive a lower salary than a comparable American. It's also probable that they get a higher salary, but also back it up with more expertise.

Unless Microsoft comes out and tells us the truth, we can only make assumptions. I just hope they have an unbiased stance and are keeping the more qualified employee, regardless of nationality.

It could be worse. Microsoft shuts down that company location and moves it overseas completely.


RE: Sooo?
By cbf on 3/6/2009 3:29:05 PM , Rating: 2
It seems that most of the posters here don't understand the legal requirements of the H1B program.

- you must document that you could not find any US workers for the job
- as part of that documentation, you must advertise the job
- you must pay the foreign worker the same prevailing wage as US workers for the job

All of the paperwork documenting this has to be filed with the US Gov't (Dept of Labor, I believe) as part of the H1B application. If Senator Grassley wants the information about Microsoft's H1B's, he need merely request it from the DOL.

H1Bs are good for six years. Obviously economic conditions can change in that time, and it may well be the case that during the tenure of an H1B a US worker who can do the job might become available. In those cases, the H1B program does not require the employer to fire the foreign worker and hire the US worker. Presumably though, during such a period of time, no new H1B Visas would be issued because plenty of US workers would be applying for the available jobs.

Also, note that many of the H1B workers use their six year period to apply for green cards -- permanent US residency, likely leading to citizenship. I think having the best and brightest of the world come to the US and decide to settle here is definitely in our long term interest.

This isn't to say that the H1B program can't be abused. As with most things, the DOL doesn't have a lot of resources to see if the claims made in an H1B application -- regarding the lack of US workers, and the true prevailing wage for the position -- are accurate. There is certainly anecdotal evidence of some Indian outsourcing firms abusing the process to bring workers over here just long enough to learn what they need and sending them back to India. But it's highly unlikely that a company like Microsoft is abusing the process. The potential penalties for a large US corporation filing bogus H1B claims is simply not worth it. Microsoft uses H1Bs to bring these workers for the long term, and that's why it's not going to lay them off disproportionately.


RE: Sooo?
By futrtrubl on 3/6/2009 4:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
- you must document that you could not find any US workers for the job
- as part of that documentation, you must advertise the job
- you must pay the foreign worker the same prevailing wage as US workers for the job

I believe that is only true if your company is classed as H1B Dependent. Those being companies with over a certain % foreign employees or those receiving stimulus money.


RE: Sooo?
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 8:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I believe that is only true if your company is classed as H1B Dependent. Those being companies with over a certain % foreign employees or those receiving stimulus money


I believe that the Sanders-Grassley amendment only applies to TARP money, not the overall stimulus package.


RE: Sooo?
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 5:39:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
- you must document that you could not find any US workers for the job
- as part of that documentation, you must advertise the job
- you must pay the foreign worker the same prevailing wage as US workers for the job


The US Department of Labor states that the H-1B law doesn't require employers to seek local talent before recruiting abroad for their US job openings, except in limited circumstances when the employer is considered H-1B dependent.

The Federal Register, dated June 30, 2006, Section II, paragraph 4, "the statute does not require employers...to demonstrate that there are no available US workers or to test the labor market for US workers as required under the permanent labor certification program."

Could you state where you are getting your information?


"We're taking it back."
By Sir Picto on 3/5/2009 11:21:34 AM , Rating: 5
I was laid off last month when my entire department was outsourced to the Philippines. It had NOTHING to do with talent. Part of the transition entailed my department training the replacements. They were as dumb as rocks, but they could be paid two bananas a day at least.

I kid you not, the people that broke the news to my department were wearing silk shirts and gold watches. The point of saving the company money is of course because it leaves more money for the big boss.

Microsoft is just as greedy as any other company with the exact same motivations. No one is out to save the world or create some sort of Utopia. With that understanding clear we can at least stop pretending that such a thing as corporate morals exist. In other words it all falls on deaf ears anyway.




RE: "We're taking it back."
By tdawg on 3/5/2009 11:44:20 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, the main goal in business is to increase profits. To that aim, all corporations are greedy, but so are their shareholders. People buy stock in companies that are going to give us a nice return and when they are struggling to do so, shareholders expect them to do everything they can to cut costs and increase profits, ROI, drive stock prices higher, etc.

In this Global economy, as disheartening and unfortunate as it is, one method of cutting costs is to outsource jobs that can be done by others for less money, such as phone support. Until American workers prove that there is a tangible business benefit to keeping those jobs here (cost-benefit ratio), they will continue to be outsourced.


RE: "We're taking it back."
By DigitalFreak on 3/5/2009 12:09:58 PM , Rating: 2
Cost-benefit ratios will always favor workers in 3rd world countries. Middle class wages in India would equal below poverty level in the US. It's all about cost of living.


RE: "We're taking it back."
By nafhan on 3/5/2009 12:36:56 PM , Rating: 2
It really sucks that you lost your job, but in an economic situation like the one we have right now there are probably a lot of companies that are making the choice between lowering costs (often by outsourcing) and going out of business.
I'd rather have an American company stay in business by outsourcing to the Philippines, than a Philippine company take over the business niche that an American company used to occupy.
Again, very sorry that you lost your job and hope you find a new one soon!


RE: "We're taking it back."
By sprockkets on 3/6/2009 3:15:32 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I'd rather have an American company stay in business by outsourcing to the Philippines, than a Philippine company take over the business niche that an American company used to occupy.


What part of the company is still American? The rich boss who is rich at the expense of the Phillipino workers? I rather buy LG products since at least they make most of their stuff in Korea, or Cowon MP3 players since they also are made in Korea, than Apple products, who are so proud to have been designed in California, but nowhere on the box does it say "Made by sweat shop labor in China."

However, why bother? Even people like Asus used to make stuff in Taiwan, now make their stuff in China.

Thankfully in my line of work, some stuff is still made right here. Copeland still makes all their compressors here, and they are good stuff.


RE: "We're taking it back."
By stargazr20 on 3/6/2009 10:57:19 AM , Rating: 2
Its Filipino and not Phillino.


RE: "We're taking it back."
By stargazr20 on 3/6/2009 10:58:12 AM , Rating: 2
I mean Phillipino.


RE: "We're taking it back."
By foxtrot9 on 3/6/2009 12:26:32 PM , Rating: 3
If you are going to be a douche, do it correctly


H-1B
By 2bdetermine on 3/5/2009 2:35:39 PM , Rating: 2
Let say a large majority of H-1B working on Windows 7. Would you rather retain the talents or fired them and work on service pack.




RE: H-1B
By nbourbaki on 3/5/2009 3:00:52 PM , Rating: 3
Are you implying that US citizens are not up to the challenge of developing Windows 7? Please, US citizens invented the software industry and Microsoft.


RE: H-1B
By 2bdetermine on 3/5/2009 5:22:13 PM , Rating: 1
Would you rather have an apprentice working on your car or an experience mechanic. Time is M$.


RE: H-1B
By nbourbaki on 3/5/2009 8:29:19 PM , Rating: 3
Once again you are implying that American software engineers are somehow inferior. Your position defies all logic.

At this point in time, the H1B program is just cheap labor. Not better, just cheaper. The program no longer serves a useful purpose to the American taxpayer and should be abolished.


RE: H-1B
By 2bdetermine on 3/5/2009 10:38:56 PM , Rating: 2
You're missing the point. This is not about inferior, incapable engineers or cheap labor. Replacing people during project near completion never a good idea.


RE: H-1B
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 10:45:06 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry I missed your point. I wouldn't have a problem with Microsoft stating that they were freezing the team finishing Windows 7. What I read was Microsoft was keeping the same distribution of H1B to US developers. Freezing the team finishing a project makes sense. I have to assume that some H1Bs will not be able to extend their 90 day H1B. So in a way, using H1Bs for something as strategic and important to Microsoft's future is counter intuitive due to H1Bs transitory nature. It makes far more sense to use US citizens who could stay on the project through it's completion and beyond.


Educators
By Devenish on 3/5/2009 10:28:03 AM , Rating: 4
Maybe instead of wasting work visas on companies like Microsoft we start reserving visas to offer more educators in math, science and other higher education for public schools and community colleges.

Sure I could rattle on about this, but instead take a moment and think about it.




RE: Educators
By DigitalFreak on 3/5/2009 12:11:11 PM , Rating: 2
Not a bad idea.


RE: Educators
By Staples on 3/5/2009 4:42:06 PM , Rating: 1
Good idea. This is step one to solving the supposed problem. And even if that problem is not as big as Microsoft would have you believe, it is still the best use for import tallent.


RE: Educators
By s12033722 on 3/6/2009 12:50:58 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is not a lack of available education, it's a lack of American students willing to actually study the difficult subjects like math, science, and engineering.

Take a look at the average US demographic, and then go to the closest major university and walk through the engineering area. You will see that at least 50% of the faculty are Asian or Indian, and that the number of Asian and Indian students is also quite disproportionately large compared to the US population. That is also true even if you just look at the demographics of the universities overall. Go check the names and student ratios in the psychology, history, graphic design, and art departments. No such disparity exists.


RE: Educators
By Denithor on 3/7/2009 4:58:22 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly correct. We train foreign students and then tell them they cannot continue to live here in our country.

Massive brain drain.

It's absolutely no wonder we're falling behind so badly in technology.


By hashish2020 on 3/5/2009 10:25:06 PM , Rating: 3
Capital mobility fueled a large portion of the expansion of the US economy in the 1990's and early 2000's...and such mobility is a mark of a FREE MARKET, you know, the capitalism 90% of dailytech readers rant about whenever anything slightly government run or socialized comes up

Then they suddenly turn into French socialists when it comes to labor mobility---how selfish of them.

They give less than a shit when it comes to minimum wage or healthcare spending, but magically when it comes to freer movement of labor, an absolute necessity to maintain free markets and free trade, they turn into rabid left wingers

Immigrants have been found in study after study to improve the economic welfare of those around them

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0107-kelley.shtm

And if you hate competition, move to France and leave the rest of us alone




By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 11:15:14 AM , Rating: 1
I think you have missed the whole point of the discussion. We are not discussing the merits of US immigration in it's totality. We are discussing the H1B program. Based on the apparent anger in your response, I'll assume you are an H1B or wanna be. Your assumption that the majority of participants in the discussion do not care about minimum wage or health care is naive at best.


By hashish2020 on 3/13/2009 3:22:59 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I am US Citizen working on a Chinese resident visa---that wants an H-1B

My apparent anger comes from being a child of Indian immigrants who came here on visas, and then proceeded to work and study harder than the lazy ass American masses who want to be middle class with a Communications degree from a community college

Productivity per dollar is what is important to a company, not productivity overall.

My assumption about the majority of the participants in the discussion is based on the responses to any sort of socialist program at all in the US

How about instead of acting snide and assuming things about my citizenship, how about you address the obvious need for labor mobility in a world with extreme capital mobility


Sen Grassley demands stuff from MS?
By Spinne on 3/5/2009 11:56:41 AM , Rating: 2
How can he demand stuff from MS? If MS doesn't wanna give out some details to him, why should he have the ability to force them to do so? And if he has this power, why don't I or you? If he wants in on MS's management strategies, he should become a major stockholder or try to bring MS to court. Last I checked it was a free country and senators are public servants, not royalty who can 'demand' stuff.




By nbourbaki on 3/5/2009 2:55:50 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft lobbied the US Congress for expansion of the H1B program before announcing the recent layoffs. Grassley, in considering Microsoft's appeal a for higher cap on H1B's needs to understand how US workers are being protected under the current program.

This whole episode has very little to do with a shortage of skilled staff available to Microsoft in the US and everything to do with abusing the system. The competition for the best and the brightest in India comes down to whether the company can send the candidate to the US, even if it's only 90 days at a time.

And just to be clear, if Senator Grassley can get his subcommittee to issue a subpoena, Microsoft will forced to provide the requested information. It's a free country based on the rule of law. In the TARP legislation, Grassley inserted language that makes it hard for companies that take TARP money to supplant US workers with foreign workers. If you are a US citizen, I would think you would be applauding Senator Grassley, not condemning him.


The Intent
By nbourbaki on 3/5/2009 1:09:59 PM , Rating: 2
The original intent of the H1B program was to allow US firms to bring skilled workers into the US because of an acute shortage of skilled technical workers. I no longer see the need for this program based on the number of skilled US citizens that are out of work.

The US government sets the law for immigration, H1B or otherwise just like every other country. I believe Microsoft is exercising their rights under the current law. I would support the repeal of the H1B program in light of the current unemployment picture in the US.

I think it's appalling that the US government allows Microsoft to operate as a monopoly while Microsoft shows so little corporate responsibility in the country that made it what it is.




RE: The Intent
By JakLee on 3/5/2009 6:22:56 PM , Rating: 2
There is relationship that American workers have with American products. If I buy nothing from American companies but instead buy everything from foreign competitors then American companies don't get my money. Enough people do this and the company disappears. Profit, while the center piece of a business, is not its only reason of existence. There are non-profits companies that are not out to make a buck, there are partnerships, and charities that have purposes other than pure profit. Even companies that have profit as their primary goal will donate money to charitable ventures for a variety of reasons; some of which is simply to lessen taxes they pay.

This part of the cost/benefit analysis is often overlooked. By purchasing products that are homegrown and by supporting both education and training of homegrown workers you help support your local infrastructure. THIS is why America is great. I am not proposing that we don't also need to look throughout the world for those with great talent and I am not advocating we don't buy foreign products either. But there is a balancing act and the cost to Americans from outsourcing is more than just a difficulty in understanding someone from a foreign country on the phone, or the savings a company makes to its bottom line from money saved on labor.


By constable on 3/5/2009 3:23:13 PM , Rating: 2
There's no doubt in my mind that Microsoft is defending this visa program purely to keep costs down. Thats business, and a business that doesn't take opportunities to cut costs is a failed business. Companies that refrain from outsourcing do so only so they can benefit from government subsidies or to slap oversized "Made in the USA" labels on their products.

From a moral standpoint it was still the right decision to make. These people live in America, pay American taxes, buy goods in America, live in American houses and live by American laws. They contribute just as much to the US economy as a full US citizen, and are deserving of all the protections given under US law. No doubt many are working with the goal of full citizenship in mind.

Firing these people on the basis of their citizenship status reeks of statism, if not racism. Citizen Entitlement stems from the notion that a superficial quality such as place of birth (or skin color, language, religion, etc) should be a factor in determining someone's job worth.




By nbourbaki on 3/5/2009 4:27:44 PM , Rating: 2
All citizens of the United States have the same protections under the law. Regardless of race, color, gender or place of birth. H1B visa holders are not US Citizens. While H1B holders enjoy many of the protections under US law while in the United States, they are foreign nationals that have been given an opportunity to work in the United States for a period of time. When unemployment was at 5% of the US workforce, it made sense to allow highly skilled foreign workers to come to the US to fill those shortfalls. Now with unemployment heading to 10% and beyond, it makes absolutely no sense at all for the US government to allow this program to continue. I'm frankly surprised that the program wasn't terminated sooner.


Salaries for H1B workers
By nextguy on 3/6/2009 8:48:39 AM , Rating: 2
Can someone actually post what the salaries are for non-H1B vs H1B workers? I have seen an example of the salaries for H1B workers and they seem very high. This kind of negates the argument that MS is hiring H1B's only to pay less wages.




RE: Salaries for H1B workers
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 9:53:13 PM , Rating: 2
Because the employer, not the Department of Labor, determines what source is used to determine the prevailing wage for an offered position, companies may choose among a variety of competing surveys, including its own wage surveys. As a result, the differences between companies H-1B and non-H1Bs are all over the board. Companies like Wipro, Infosys, Tata and Satyam (top 4 of 5 H-1B holders) pay 1/3 the cost of a US based resource. Since those companies never hire US based resources in the US for technical positions, they set their pay grades artificially lower. Companies like Microsoft and IBM that have a large number of US based local resources typically pay half the cost of their American counterparts.


discrimination
By steelincable on 3/5/2009 11:22:15 AM , Rating: 1
For once I agree with Microsoft's decision. The senator's request is analogous to saying 'keep the white people and fire the black ones'.




RE: discrimination
By walk2k on 3/5/2009 12:59:28 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. If MS did this they would open themselves up to MAJOR civil rights lawsuits.

Frankly I'm surprised a senator would even suggest such a blatantly racist idea, but then again he is an old-boy Republican, guess I shouldn't be surprised.


Grassley
By werepossum on 3/5/2009 5:35:51 PM , Rating: 1
I have no problem with Grassley making this plea - it's his job to protect Americans and the economy. I have no problem with Microsoft telling him no - it's Microsoft's job to provide affordable products that people want to buy while obeying the law and providing profits for those whose investments have made Microsoft possible. Both parties are doing what they should be doing.

If Congress wants to promote American workers, it can change the immigration laws. Better yet, it can selectively subsidize education for engineering, mathematics, and science. Best yet, it can destroy the teachers' unions and reform our education system to be performance-based as opposed to jobs based, teaching science rather than ideology.

To those stating that a plea to retain American workers is racist or "statist", you are morons in the actual literal sense of the word.




RE: Grassley
By JediJeb on 3/6/2009 10:05:36 AM , Rating: 2
I agree with most of what you said, but to correct something that is said about the teacher's union. The teacher's unions really have no power other than to help them organize and sometimes get better pay, which right now is really not that good compared to other professions. Also most teachers would prefer to teach meaningful course content but are locked in by the state board of edcuation to teach the curriculum mandated by the state or federal government which does not push heavy focus on science and math. Most want the students writing more poems and painting pictures than learning how to balance a checkbook, and since that has been the practice for over 10 years now in most systems no wonder we have young people losing their houses from accepting loans they could never repay.


Change is coming
By laidoffandretired on 3/5/2009 11:11:29 PM , Rating: 3
I worked for Lucent in IT and hold 2 patents. I was qualified but lost my job. When Alcatel took over Lucent, Americans lost their jobs while the French remained employed. Look at Inbev and what is happening to Anheuser-Busch employees in the US. Wakeup... corporate greed is killing the American way of life. Other countries protect their citizens, we should do the same. Wait a few more months when unemployment hits 10%. The majority of US citizens will demand we protect our own people.




Finally
By wvh on 3/5/2009 6:30:13 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not the biggest of Microsoft fans... But I'm happy to finally see them do something morally decent and level-headed. You can argue companies should prefer local employees during the hiring process, but once foreigners have been hired, made the move – possibly with their family – and done the same hard work as anybody else, you can't just kick them out as if they have any less rights than other employees. I work in international companies (global and Europe), what if they were to kick Americans out because of the bad economy? Nationality has nothing to do with business.




Activation
By jonmcc33 on 3/6/2009 6:38:16 PM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft lays off foreign workers who else is going to activate my Windows all the time?




By hashish2020 on 3/5/2009 10:25:07 PM , Rating: 1
Capital mobility fueled a large portion of the expansion of the US economy in the 1990's and early 2000's...and such mobility is a mark of a FREE MARKET, you know, the capitalism 90% of dailytech readers rant about whenever anything slightly government run or socialized comes up

Then they suddenly turn into French socialists when it comes to labor mobility---how selfish of them.

They give less than a shit when it comes to minimum wage or healthcare spending, but magically when it comes to freer movement of labor, an absolute necessity to maintain free markets and free trade, they turn into rabid left wingers

Immigrants have been found in study after study to improve the economic welfare of those around them

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0107-kelley.shtm

And if you hate competition, move to France and leave the rest of us alone




Fools
By Mumrik on 3/5/09, Rating: 0
Another example of Corporate Anti Americanism
By vectrav2 on 3/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Another example of Corporate Anti Americanism
By A Stoner on 3/5/2009 10:14:17 AM , Rating: 2
So, you, as an employer would rather hire a lazy entitled recent graduate with mediocre grades rather than a highly motivated, determined and hard working person? While it may or may not be true that we graduate enough people to fill these jobs, not all people end up being equally qualified for an extremely competitive work environment, such as at Microsoft. On most accounts though, the USA does not graduate enough people in the right degrees to fill these jobs. Just like me going to baseball camp three summers in a row is not going to make me into someone that the major leagues are going to recruit, going to college for a degree does not make a person qualified for a specific job.


By jackedupandgoodtogo on 3/5/2009 7:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
So how would you qualify a potential employee? If you throw out their degree, their education, their training, what are you going to qualify them on? Their nationality? Their compensation? Until you actually put someone with no known background (the majority of new employees) to work on something, you're never going to know their capability.

Also, why do you imply everyone graduating in America is "lazy entitled recent graduate with mediocre grades" and foreign workers as "highly motivated, determined, and hard working"?


By robvarga on 3/6/2009 8:53:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So how would you qualify a potential employee? If you throw out their degree, their education, their training, what are you going to qualify them on? Their nationality? Their compensation?


Actually it is you who implies that they should be qualify them based on nationality by advocating that American citizens should be preferred.

quote:
Until you actually put someone with no known background (the majority of new employees) to work on something, you're never going to know their capability.


Why do you assume that Microsoft (or anyone else for that matter) would or should hire someone with no experience at all? Professional experience may be judged by what someone put down on the desk so far, and also there can be tests which can judge people's professional experience and practical knowledge in the relevant areas.

BR,

Robert


By bankerdude on 3/5/2009 10:14:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The whole of this alphabet soup of visa programs constitute an affront to US citizenship


Dude, grow up. If you haven't been paying attention for the last 50 years or so, we are in a global economy. Do you honestly believe keeping all foreigners out of our country is the right way to maintain global dominance? I'm sure glad we didn't feel that way 60 years ago when Albert Einstein was welcomed into this country. Things might have been a little different if the Axis powers had developed nuclear technology first.
This whole notion of government interfering with private enterprise is just wrong. Elected officials do not have the ability or intricate knowledge of industry to efficiently manage corporate decisions. If they did, they would already be working for the company, not the taxpayers. Same thing with the nationalization of the banking industry. Do I honestly want Barney Frank & Co. running the bank I keep my deposits with or own stock in?


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 10:36:12 AM , Rating: 2
As if the laissez-faire attitude towards regulation of the financial industry really paid off. Pure capitalism like pure communism is unworkable. Had Greenspan pushed to regulate derivatives instead of testifying to Congress that derivatives like Credit Default Swaps were, "extraordinarily useful" maybe, just maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now. Barney Frank, John Thain or Bernard Madoff. Pick your poison.


By Steve1981 on 3/5/2009 10:25:42 AM , Rating: 5
It's kind of funny; I was thinking a lot of US citizens constituted an affront to US citizenship.


RE: Another example of Corporate Anti Americanism
By JediJeb on 3/5/2009 10:34:49 AM , Rating: 5
I sort of agree with this. Deep down I would say I am a Nationalist when it comes to employment and purchasing. But in all honesty there really needs to be an attitude change among American workers. Where I work it has been difficult lately to hire anyone who is willing to work. And I am not talking about in the very hard positions like we once had where someone had to work hard in 100F heat with a shovel all day, but the simple jobs like data entry. We had one we hired, only thing to do first day was enter data from a form into the computer, she left at lunch and did not return, then called and said the work was too difficult. Another was hired and after months of making simple mistakes such as not reading the forms to know what to enter, when confronted would just say " oh that was slowing me down, so I didn't read it" of course that lead to much loss of time for someone else to correct all the mistakes.

I hasn't always been like this, but in the last few years it seem 50% of those we interview only ask how many vacation days, lunch time, break time and bonuses they will get, not what does the job require. One being interviewed for an entry level job even asked how long until they would be in management. When I repliet that I worked here 15 years before becoming a manager they did not even want the job then.

If we would start again to teach kids from birth up that you work for the things you have, just as I was taught, then maybe they would again appreciate what they have and be willing to put forth effort to make themselves better people. Im not saying all today are bad, we have had some very good hires lately, people who are dedicated to their work and are willing to take responsibility for their work. It's just that it seems those people are becoming harder and harder to find, and I am afraid the new administration is going to foster a greater expectation of intitlement in our up coming workforce that will really set us back in productivity and performance in the global marketplace.


By YoshoMasaki on 3/5/2009 6:48:12 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. See (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,451222,00.html ) this and (http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/12/03/dr-keit... ) this if you have any doubt about where the quality of this nation's labor pool is headed.


By omnicronx on 3/5/2009 10:41:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There always have been plenty of well qualified Americans for every possible job opening that Microsoft ever had, and the same for the rest of the IT industry.
Obviously this is untrue, Microsoft wants the best of the best, they hire based on skill, not the country in which you are born. You are being very naive to think that Microsoft can compete at the same level with only using American workers. The biggest software company in the world requires the best programmers they can get their hands on.


By bankerdude on 3/5/2009 10:51:48 AM , Rating: 4
The same is true for many other industries as well. It's not just limited to the software programming industry. I highly doubt some of the brainchild earlier posters on this thread would be posting at all if they weren't using a machine running on an Intel or AMD chip, which happen to be diffused in other countries by highly skilled workers. I'm definitely not anti-American, I just believe this whole idea of entitlement is wrong and is one of the reasons why our industry has declined to the point it is currently at.


By Spuke on 3/5/2009 1:03:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I just believe this whole idea of entitlement is wrong and is one of the reasons why our industry has declined to the point it is currently at.
I don't think it's declined myself but it has changed. A lot of us Americans would rather buy something now then work for something then buy it. Not all of us, but a lot of us are like that. Entitlement seems to be the word of the day. In the future, I predict that the few of us that work hard will drag everyone else along or else we'll see a decline in the way of life that a lot of us enjoy today. Of course, those that continue to work hard won't skip a beat.


RE: Another example of Corporate Anti Americanism
By vectrav2 on 3/5/2009 12:25:30 PM , Rating: 3
Not true. Its all about cheap labor full stop.
Checkout Numbersusa.com zazona.com the Lou Dobbs clip about H-1B hiring to avoid hiring qualified US citizens.


By sunjava04 on 3/6/2009 4:10:18 PM , Rating: 2
well, this is all bias organization like kkkk.....

bush allows 700,000 student visa in 2007. which is highest in the us immigration history plus immigrants and illegal people. think about that.....why


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 6:58:11 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I'm missing your point. Other than GW Bush being a complete idiot?


By VooDooAddict on 3/5/2009 10:57:02 AM , Rating: 2
There is a medium ground here that people are avoiding.

I've worked with plenty of H1B holders. Some are truly exceptional and talented individuals that I'm proud to be working with side be side. Their talents and minds would have been wasted in their home countries.

Others are simply drones pushing a button for far less $$.

Most direct hire H1Bs that I've met are very qualified. Companies need to jump though some hoops and paperwork to have an H1B on staff. They don't do it to save money and time. They do it because the person is more qualified then anyone else, usually due to experience. I highly suspect this is the situation at Microsoft.

There are also headhunter "consulting" shops that specialize in H1Bs and just throw large numbers of under qualified people at a problem. The shops entire premise is to low ball American competition and take a large % of the H1Bs paycheck.

In this difficult time I see no problem tightening requirements for NEW H1Bs. For new H1B requests, make employers show proof they attempted to fill with citizens or existing green card holders.

Eliminating H1Bs entirely is just ignorant and could have the effect of causing more problems for American workers, not less.


By tastyratz on 3/5/2009 11:24:38 AM , Rating: 3
Agreed.
I have no problem with hiring someone with a H1B who is MORE qualified.

I DO however have a problem hiring someone here on visa to do the same position as an American but for substantially substandard rates. If Microsoft was replacing all of their skilled american programmers with substandard pay foreign workers I would be pissed.

You want the best? Fine with me.

You just want to save 50 cents? I don't agree.


By hashish2020 on 3/5/2009 10:28:13 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny

This is a way to cut costs without cutting jobs

Again, funny to hear dailytech posters (who will rip on the UAW and AFL-CIO unions) complain that they need such anti-capitalist worker protections because they would rather not compete


By sunjava04 on 3/6/2009 4:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
well, without knowing complete truth, dont jump into it!

Microsoft earns most profit from os..., their os not just for america but it been sold worldwide so they need people from all over the world...

for internship hiring, they have 8 hours chains of several interviews(for even internship interview, u need strongest resume). later they hire for internship at seattle , and after some months they offer them H1-b visa if they are helpful to them.......

company's ceo and other executives all are americans. do u think they hire international first against american??? unless there is reason....
hi-b visa process is not easy....they have to hire many lawyers for that and fulfil certain immigration requirements which is pain in the ass.
but still they willing to, which means it more important to them...

their company is like one house....u cannot tell them what to do!!!


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 4:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft earns most profit from os


Wrong, Microsoft Office accounts for 50% of their revenue. OS accounts for 30% of their revenue. And how much of Microsoft's revenue comes from India?

quote:
for internship hiring, they have 8 hours chains of several interviews(for even internship interview, u need strongest resume). later they hire for internship at seattle , and after some months they offer them H1-b visa if they are helpful to them....... company's ceo and other executives all are americans. do u think they hire international first against american??? unless there is reason....


The reason is access to cheap labor. Their interview process is just as tedious for US based applicants.


By mindless1 on 3/6/2009 9:14:52 PM , Rating: 2
Except, "more qualified" is often BS.

When a foreigner gets into a university they would've have, if they weren't foreign, did they actually EARN that placement? No.

If foreigner goes to a school off-shore that has lax programs because the pool of participants are sub-standard relative to 1st world countries, is that an equal education? No.

I'm not saying there aren't bright people at MS, not that a foreigner in the US can't have earned the job they have, only that the whole topic has been grossly oversimplified into some teenage-mindset, altruistic concept of either nationalism or globalism.

It's never that simple, and I haven't even started on the idea of the low character of a person who would leave behind those they lived with, and hopefully befriended and loved, abandoning them and their country just to have more for themselves.

We (meaning the whole planet) need to discourage people from abandoning their own country. Let bright minds flourish and benefit their own country, instead of causing disparate groups that can't develop technologically. If you want to think globally and be fair, the answer is not pooling everyone into the US, it's to assemble separate teams that have their own projects lead by the brightest in their respective country instead of having these potential leaders play servant to money in the US.

We, humans, are better off when bright individuals are left to do their own thing instead of being puppets in a monopoly game. Redundancy becomes a waste at some point.


By hashish2020 on 3/13/2009 3:35:21 AM , Rating: 1
"It's never that simple, and I haven't even started on the idea of the low character of a person who would leave behind those they lived with, and hopefully befriended and loved, abandoning them and their country just to have more for themselves."

At the risk of being crude, you are a fucking idiot.

Do you KNOW any immigrants? Almost every single one of the immigrants I know is supporting large segments of their family, and wants many of them to come to the US (or Canada). They pay for schools the family would have not been able to afford, medical care beyond the level that might cause massive infection, train tickets so family members can see one another

You, sir, are an ignorant asshole


By hashish2020 on 3/5/2009 10:17:30 PM , Rating: 2
"Others are simply drones pushing a button for far less $$."

If they are, and you hate that they will do a job for less money (and therefore more productive by dollar) THEN GET A JOB THAT IS MORE THAN ROTE BUTTON PRESSING...and be GOOD at it

And don't expect to get paid what is upper class wages all around the world because you have a college degree and aren't retarded

Hey Americans who have never lived anywhere else---WELCOME to the WORLD


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 12:22:10 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see companies that lay off employees subject to the WARN Act, be excluded for one year from hiring any H1Bs. I'd also like to see the WARN Act strengthened to be more inclusive and less site specific.


By sunjava04 on 3/6/2009 3:50:31 PM , Rating: 2
well, they are not crazy....corporation hires employee from top schools.if they think its fine...than who u are telling them what to do??


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 4:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
So by extension of your argument, the US government should have no say in hiring decisions based race, gender, age, creed or place of national origin? Or that the workplace should be safe? Or how about sexual harassment? How about companies that are receiving public funds? Your argument is laughable and naive.


By Arribajuan on 3/5/2009 11:44:12 AM , Rating: 1
Following this nationalist way of thinking the usa should ban all outsourcing whatsoever.

These jobs will be in the hands of the skilled. either usa, h1 or outsourced.

Usually, usa workers have a very low performance / cost ratio.


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 10:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
IT outsourcing was a thriving business before off-shoring. Off-shoring provided a large pool of far less qualified, but much cheaper labor. Outsourcing has a strong value proposition with or without off-shoring.


By Reclaimer77 on 3/5/2009 5:51:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All further visa requests from Microsoft should be refused at infinitum. There always have been plenty of well qualified Americans for every possible job opening that Microsoft ever had, and the same for the rest of the IT industry. The whole of this alphabet soup of visa programs constitute an affront to US citizenship.


Look idiot, it's this simple. "Buy American, Hire American" never works in our favor because it triggers retaliatory reactions from other countries and markets. And we ALWAYS, ALWAYS, lose when that happens because we can't compete in a world market when the deck is stacked against us.

You, Obama, and everyone else that thinks Buy American, Hire American is good for America needs to get a clue.


RE: Another example of Corporate Anti Americanism
By vectrav2 on 3/6/2009 12:53:49 AM , Rating: 2
Calling me an idiot shows how shallow you understanding of this issue is.

Its like this you see when I last looked the US was still a country and like any other country it should make sure its citizens are looked after first and foremost no matter what the corporate consequences are.
If you do business here you employ the locals.
I work with H-1B visa holders all the time they are charming good people and many are highly talented, many are not.
Why should they not be in their own country building a middle class there, instead of being cynically used as blunt instruments by corporate America to bludgeon wages and benefits lower.
Study after study shows no high tech labor shortage just the opposite.
There is however a shortage of wages.
For example if you are an African American with a high tech degree you have a 70 percent chance of not finding work in your chosen field or being unemployed.


By MrPoletski on 3/6/2009 9:04:13 AM , Rating: 2
protectionism is what made the great depression great.


By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 11:38:06 AM , Rating: 2
Controlling immigration is not protectionism. Protectionism is the economic policy of restraining trade between nations. Protectionism did not cause the Great Depression. It worsened the Great Depression but wasn't the impetus. US international trade at the time was a very small part of overall economic activity. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act caused other countries to retaliate which deepened the depression.


Then the Senate will....
By Marlin1975 on 3/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Then the Senate will....
By snowbro on 3/5/2009 9:44:13 AM , Rating: 5
I think this senator is really REALLY short-sighted. He is clearly doing this as a political maneuver to try and win seats for his next election as the idea 'sounds' good to his electorate I'm sure.

A company like Microsoft needs the ability, however, to tap into the WORLDWIDE pool of talent, and needlessly limiting their capacity to do that only hurts American companies. As it stands right now, the H1B Visa process is absolutely ridiculous. Only 65,000 H1B Visas per year, that you can only apply for, ONCE per year. These applicants are extremely talented individuals, scientists, engineers, doctors, high-level consultants, etc who are usually at the top of their fields in their respective countries. It is a good portion of THESE people who have contributed to the BRAIN drain in their respective countries, and the BRAIN ESCALATION here in the United States.

And its funny how people call them foreign, because unless you're a native american indian, your parents, or grandparents, and so-on ALSO CAME FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY looking for new opportunity!

BTW, most H1B workers are paid the same or HIGHER wages than their American counterparts... Ref: http://searchwarp.com/swa309961.htm


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nosfe on 3/5/2009 9:48:12 AM , Rating: 5
RE: Then the Senate will....
By Spivonious on 3/5/2009 12:59:15 PM , Rating: 2
Hilarious!


RE: Then the Senate will....
By omnicronx on 3/5/2009 10:17:15 AM , Rating: 5
I completely agree, whats more is 5000 workers is a drop in the bucket. They worked for Microsoft, does the senator really think these people won't be able to get a job elsewhere? I could get a new job without hassle if Microsoft was on my resume.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Machinegear on 3/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Then the Senate will....
By IGoodwin on 3/5/2009 12:36:49 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
quote:
A company like Microsoft needs the ability, however, to tap into the WORLDWIDE pool of talent, and needlessly limiting their capacity to do that only hurts American companies.
Ok. Now you are being short-sighted. I agree with your general premise though. Microsoft does need the best talent to be ahead of the technology curve. However, global talent can be tapped outside the US. There is no reason for a global company to import cheap labor into the US replacing local talent unless the company is looking to lower labor costs. Creative talent (intellectual property) is pretty fluid now days. If a high-tech company like Microsoft hasn't figured that out yet, they probably will need a bailout soon.


If you are advocating sending a job overseas rather than employing a person on a H1B visa, then that is too much irony!

At least a person on a H1B lives in the US, pays taxes, uses the local businesses, and has to remain in good financial standing, as well as uproot family. Nearly anyone I've spoken to, and having gone through the process, I know quite a few, do not want to see outsourcing just as much as any American.

For the record, H1B visa's are awarded to countries in proportion to their population; thus, countries like India and China will get the majority of visa's. People from countries like the UK have a harder time. There are many issue with the H1B visa program, but it is better than sending your money overseas to improve the standard of living somewhere else!


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Machinegear on 3/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Then the Senate will....
By lco45 on 3/5/2009 6:59:04 PM , Rating: 5
What a load of rubbish.

You don't have to become a US citizen (often losing citizenship in your own country) just because you feel like working in the US for a few years.

I'm Australian and have worked in Japan, the UK, and France as an IT guy, and each time I've contributed my hard work to a grateful company, made friends and supported the local bars.

BTW, what are the good IT job sites in the US? I've got some relatives in New York, might be fun to work there for a while...

Luke


RE: Then the Senate will....
By matware on 3/5/2009 10:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
No, in the case of Microsoft, the visa scheme is a way for them to get smart, educated, hard working people to work in the same room and keep ahead of the tech curve, and produce products that are relevant to a global market. I imagine that most of the visa workers at MS would dread the idea of becoming a US citizen to work at MS. What sane person would want to revoke their citizenship with a stable sane democracy rather than a corrupt police state :-)


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 10:51:37 AM , Rating: 2
You obviously have never been to India or China or worked with anyone from either country.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By DigitalFreak on 3/5/2009 12:01:08 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
And its funny how people call them foreign, because unless you're a native american indian, your parents, or grandparents, and so-on ALSO CAME FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY looking for new opportunity!


Sorry dipshit, but being born here means I'm a native of the USA.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By someguy123 on 3/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Then the Senate will....
By aegisofrime on 3/5/2009 12:41:41 PM , Rating: 2
If you want to put it that way, every human on Earth is an African. Since humans came out of Africa.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By bhieb on 3/5/2009 1:14:00 PM , Rating: 2
Think you may have replied to the wrong one. The OP position would be that we are all African because our ancestry says so (which is not what native means). However this guy is actually correct native indicates where you were born not your ancestry. Yes my great grandparents were definitely foreigners, but I am a native American.

Some definitions from define:native google search.

# characteristic of or existing by virtue of geographic origin; "the native North American sugar maple"; "many native artists studied abroad"
# an indigenous person who was born in a particular place; "the art of the natives of the northwest coast"; "the Canadian government scrapped plans to tax the grants to aboriginal college students"
# belonging to one by birth; "my native land"; "one's native language"
# a person born in a particular place or country; "he is a native of Brazil"


RE: Then the Senate will....
By TerranMagistrate on 3/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Then the Senate will....
By bhieb on 3/5/2009 1:16:56 PM , Rating: 2
Some definitions from define:native google search.

# characteristic of or existing by virtue of geographic origin; "the native North American sugar maple"; "many native artists studied abroad"
# an indigenous person who was born in a particular place; "the art of the natives of the northwest coast"; "the Canadian government scrapped plans to tax the grants to aboriginal college students"
# belonging to one by birth; "my native land"; "one's native language"
# a person born in a particular place or country; "he is a native of Brazil"

Not to double post dumbass, but my grandparents have no impact on me being native to my birthplace. By definition you are native to where you were born. Call my grandparents foreigners all you want, by again I am Native to America.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By surt on 3/5/2009 3:51:59 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, I'm of viking descent and we got here way before the so called 'native americans'.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Oregonian2 on 3/5/2009 1:04:20 PM , Rating: 4
Sorry, but you are politically incorrect.

A person of native American heritage who was born in France, grew up in Germany, and who now lives in Norway is considered way way more American than someone of say Japanese heritage but who was born in California, who's parents were born in Kansas, and who's grandparents were born in Nebraska.

I don't claim to understand it, but that's the way is is.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Wererat on 3/5/2009 12:06:31 PM , Rating: 4
"These applicants are extremely talented individuals, scientists, engineers, doctors, high-level consultants, etc who are usually at the top of their fields in their respective countries. "

That's a ----ed lie. Yes, H1B does cover doctors and scientists, but it's mostly used to import cheap indentured servant-coders from India and China, with the effect that wages for American IT workers remained stagnant through the last expansion, and Americans are first to be cut when downturns hit. Look up supply and demand curves if this concept gets fuzzy for you.

H1Bs are indentured servants because any change in their employment status sends them home. They usually remain dependent on their host company to navigate the long tedious process of citizenship application, while the company's interest is best served by delaying that process. I can't count how many H1Bs I've known that suffer the demands for crazy hours, no advancement, and low pay all while begging their company to please advance their application another step.

"And its funny how people call them foreign"

So open up the gates to full citizenship ... but then MS and others would have to treat them like regular folk and not imported slave-work.

The problem people have is not their foreignness but the terms under which they compete for jobs.

Lastly the article you cite is poorly researched. The problem lies in determining "prevailing wage." Say the *actual* median wage of workers in a certain position is $50k. However the standard deviation on this is large, with newbie AS holders getting $30k and a few gurus making $80k. The company applying for H1B is entitled to list "prevailing wage" of $30k. Hire H1B at $35k, toss out existing worker at $50k, and report that you're paying more than the prevailing wage. That's the real practice in the field.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By rcc on 3/5/2009 7:09:41 PM , Rating: 2
Hot tip. The "native american" people immigrated too. So what's your point?


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Nik00117 on 3/6/2009 7:08:25 AM , Rating: 2
I'd tell the Senate that I'll fire whoever is not performing. I don't care if their foreign, american of alien. It's a capitlist market and for a senetor to request that we fire foreigners before Americans is crazy! I'm sorry but if I had to make the choice of who to fire weather or not you were american or not wouldn't have a thing to do with my decision. My decision would come down to your performance, thats it. Which is how Microsoft will do it.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By DeepBlue1975 on 3/6/2009 7:44:06 AM , Rating: 2
Great for those who like freedom.
All that everybody needed was someone telling the big corps who they should and shouldn't employ or fire.

The senator surely knows best than any manager inside the company.

It's like the waiter at a restaurant commanding you to eat fish when you actually want meat loaf.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Mithan on 3/5/2009 9:54:05 AM , Rating: 5
It isn't that there is not enough American workers, it is that in many cases, people from other countries are willing to work harder.

Either way, the company should be allowed to hire who it wants, not what the Government wants.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 9:36:14 AM , Rating: 2
The US government should not have a say in who a company can legally hire unless that company has discriminated in it's hiring practices or is taking taxpayer dollars.

On the other hand, it is the role of government to legislate who can legally seek employment. This is true for all governments around the world not just in the US. Why would the citizens of any country allow foreign workers to displace them. I'm all for enticing the best of the best to immigrate to the US but that's not what's happening in the H1B program. The program has turned into cheap labor and nothing more.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/5/2009 9:57:13 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
It has been shown that H1-Bs work more hours for less pay then other workers.


Unfortunately there are certain realities people must accept in life. One of those realities is that if someone is available to do X, he can do X as well as you can, and he is willing to do X for less money than you are, people are going to flock to him over you if they want X. Frankly, I see no reason to stop this: this nation didn't become great by jingoistic attitudes that Americans were more deserving than anybody else and therefore should get better compensation. It became great by innovating and competing; it became great by taking all those intelligent foreigners who were willing to work hard and smart.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By mikefarinha on 3/5/2009 11:39:30 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly. The labor pool is just another example of supply and demand at play.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Wererat on 3/5/2009 12:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
Cool, so as long as there are billions of people in developing countries, the supply/demand curve for these jobs dictates that the wage drops to near nothing. Unfortunately the cost of living here doesn't follow suit.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/5/2009 1:32:25 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Cool, so as long as there are billions of people in developing countries, the supply/demand curve for these jobs dictates that the wage drops to near nothing.


So long as they are willing and able to do job X for near nothing, yes. Of course typically the better educated these folks become (which is necessary to do more complex work), the higher standard of living they demand along with it.

quote:
Unfortunately the cost of living here doesn't follow suit.


That's how life works. When leaner competitors show up, the game changes.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Spuke on 3/5/2009 4:36:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's how life works. When leaner competitors show up, the game changes.
Yep. That's life. Best to become adept at more than one thing.

1. It makes you more valuable, hence you get paid more money.
2. You can move to another field that pays more money if your present field dries up.

If you want to be safe from layoffs and outsourcing, start your own business and hire who you want.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 10:18:45 AM , Rating: 2
It's not jingoistic for the government to control immigration. It's common sense. I'm all for enticing the best and the brightest from around the world to immigrate to the US. But that's not what the H1B program is all about. Is there any litmus test that any H1B is at the top of their field or they are the best or brightest? No. They are sponsored by a US company and meet minimal academic qualifications. While in the US, they are treated far worse and at half the pay of their American counterparts. Companies like Microsoft lobby the American congress to extend and expand the program to perpetuate access to cheap labor.

When there were far more jobs than qualified job applicants in the US, the program made sense. Now with unemployment heading to 10% and beyond, I expect the citizens of the US to demand an end to this program.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 10:42:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's not jingoistic for the government to control immigration.


Depends on how much control they try to exert. There are obviously limits as to how much immigration a country could reasonably handle in a period of time. Beyond that I say: give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.

quote:
to perpetuate access to cheap labor


And this is a problem because?

quote:
Now with unemployment heading to 10% and beyond, I expect the citizens of the US to demand an end to this program.


If the US citizens are willing to undercut the foreign workers, by all means let them. Otherwise, too bad. Unless we plan on isolating ourselves from the world, protectionism doesn't work.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 11:52:09 AM , Rating: 2
As a US citizen, I'm far more inclined to support an H1B program to exist when the lack of qualified staffing put US firms at a disadvantage in the world marketplace. As unemployment rises in the US, I'm far more inclined to severely limit the ability of US firms to employ those foreign workers on US soil.

Protectionism is the economic policy of restraining trade between nations. I don't advocate the restraint of trade. Only a common sense approach to transitory labor immigration at a time of high unemployment


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 12:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Protectionism is the economic policy of restraining trade between nations. I don't advocate the restraint of trade.


I would say that term protectionism can apply to heavy restrictions on immigration as well: the item being restricted is foreign human capital, which is quite a valuable commodity. This is being done to protect our domestic human capital, who are not inclined to compete.

quote:
I'm far more inclined to severely limit the ability of US firms to employ those foreign workers on US soil.


I'm more inclined to open up the borders a bit more to allow more hard working, intelligent foreigners the opportunity to become citizens. If our home grown folks are unwilling to compete against them in the labor market, they can go hungry until they are willing to accept a little less. The world has changed; we aren't the only game in town and there are people willing and able to do as good of quality work as we do for less. If we don't adapt to that new reality, we're dead.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 12:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
Then you're creating your own personal definition for a well defined term

Your assumption is there is competition. Many US companies hire H1B for lower costs and lack of worker protection. There is no competition. As long as these companies have access to this pool of labor, US citizens get shortchanged.

Where would you draw the line? I've seen many desperately poor children in India that would work here for pennies a day. And when enough US children get hungry enough maybe they will compete and work for those same pennies.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 12:50:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then you're creating your own personal definition for a well defined term


No, not really. I'm defining human capital as a commodity, which it is. It is a commodity that we are trying to restrict intake such that we can protect its value here. It is no different from restricting trade on cars because we don't want the value of the cars we produce to drop.

quote:
Your assumption is there is competition. Many US companies hire H1B for lower costs and lack of worker protection. There is no competition. As long as these companies have access to this pool of labor, US citizens get shortchanged.


If US citizens try to compete on price, there will be competition. As it is now, we expect to be paid triple the going rate because we're US citizens. Unfortunately, the world is coming to realize that our labor isn't worth that.

quote:
Where would you draw the line? I've seen many desperately poor children in India that would work here for pennies a day. And when enough US children get hungry enough maybe they will compete and work for those same pennies.


There is no line to be drawn. If millions of people are willing and able to code for pennies a day, guess what the value of coding is?


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 1:39:07 PM , Rating: 2
Commodity or not, immigrant labor has not been considered international trade since the abolition of slavery. Since protectionism has a negative connotation, I understand why you would like to use the term to make a point. By law, only licensed doctors are allowed to practice medicine in the US. The majority of people don't consider this protectionism, just regulated. Much in the same way as immigration is regulated.

I pay twice as much in wages for an Indian H1B than I do for the same resource in India. Based on your logic, why should I pay twice the amount in wages just because they hold an H1B?


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 2:08:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Commodity or not, immigrant labor has not been considered international trade since the abolition of slavery. Since protectionism has a negative connotation, I understand why you would like to use the term to make a point.


Semantics. If you don't want call it as protectionism, so be it. It nonetheless directly comparable to protectionism.

quote:
By law, only licensed doctors are allowed to practice medicine in the US. The majority of people don't consider this protectionism. Much in the same way as immigration is regulated.


Not comparable. Presumably, we only allow licensed doctors to practice for reasons of public safety, not to try and inflate their salary.

quote:
I pay twice as much in wages for an Indian H1B than I do for the same resource in India. Based on your logic, why should I pay twice the amount in wages just because they hold an H1B?


If the job can be done from India, you shouldn't.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 3:04:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Semantics. If you don't want call it as protectionism, so be it. It nonetheless directly comparable to protectionism.


It is semantics in the sense of political propaganda to equate protectionism with immigration control.

quote:
Not comparable. Presumably, we only allow licensed doctors to practice for reasons of public safety, not to try and inflate their salary.


The US limits the number of legal foreign workers for the common good of the citizenry. At the current unemployment rate in the US, the H1B program has no useful purpose for the common good and should be terminated.

As unemployment rises in the US, programs like the H1B will have less and less support by US citizens. Politicians that support these programs will join the ranks of the unemployed. If unemployment rises above 15%, it could get so ugly that H1B decide it's not safe for them to work here anymore.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 3:17:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is semantics in the sense of political propaganda to equate protectionism with immigration control.


Not as I see things. As I stated, if the only reason we are strictly limiting immigration is to artificially inflate our labor costs, it is protectionism in my book. If you don't agree, I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree at this point.

quote:
The US limits the number of legal foreign workers for the common good of the citizenry.


The government limits the number of legal foreign workers for the perceived common good of the citizenry. As time goes on and the USA becomes less and less competitive in the global marketplace, we may find our "common good" would have been better served by acting differently.

quote:
At the current unemployment rate in the US, the H1B program has no useful purpose for the common good and should be terminated.


Kill H1B for all I care. Open up immigration so significantly more foreign skilled workers can become citizens. And of course, if current American citizens see better opportunities elsewhere, they are free to leave at any time.

quote:
If unemployment rises above 15%, it could get so ugly that H1B decide it's not safe for them to work here anymore.


So its a self correcting problem!


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 3:58:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree at this point.


Agreed

quote:
The government limits the number of legal foreign workers for the perceived common good of the citizenry. As time goes on and the USA becomes less and less competitive in the global marketplace, we may find our "common good" would have been better served by acting differently.


Perhaps, but opening up further immigration during a time of high unemployment doesn't sound like the fast track to prosperity to me.

quote:
Kill H1B for all I care. Open up immigration so significantly more foreign skilled workers can become citizens.


If the program in question were merit based, I would support it. I think the American public would recognize the potential of such an asset. The H1Bs are not in the top 85% in their field. They are just cheap labor. Allowed to work in the US under false pretenses. I think the backlash of US public sentiment could get very ugly.

quote:
if current American citizens see better opportunities elsewhere, they are free to leave at any time.


Sarcasm alert: Yes, Indian and Chinese immigration policy is far more liberal that US policy.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 4:51:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Perhaps, but opening up further immigration during a time of high unemployment doesn't sound like the fast track to prosperity to me.


Short term, no. Long term, yes.

Keep in mind, I'm not advocating opening up the flood gates to every impoverished soul so that they can overwhelm our economy and litter our streets with homeless. However, opening up a good bit more to get more fresh talent that will help grow our economy is far from a bad thing, even in the midst of a recession.

quote:
Allowed to work in the US under false pretenses. I think the backlash of US public sentiment could get very ugly.


Then work to end the abuse, not the program!


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 5:16:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Short term, no. Long term, yes.


Once again if you're talking about the best and the brightest, than you won't get an argument from me. Maybe I've been too close to the abuses of the system to be objective. I've seen how the H1B program has been abused and as a result believe that it should be abolished.

quote:
Keep in mind, I'm not advocating opening up the flood gates to every impoverished soul so that they can overwhelm our economy and litter our streets with homeless.


I couldn't agree more.

quote:
However, opening up a good bit more to get more fresh talent that will help grow our economy is far from a bad thing, even in the midst of a recession.


When US companies can't find qualified resources to fill positions, I think a temporary visa program to fill that void has merit. When taxpayers are footing the bills for unemployed US workers who could fill those roles is ludicrous and counter productive to expanding the US economy.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 5:25:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe I've been too close to the abuses of the system to be objective. I've seen how the H1B program has been abused and as a result believe that it should be abolished.


I can certainly understand how that might sour your view on things.

quote:
When taxpayers are footing the bills for unemployed US workers who could fill those roles is ludicrous and counter productive to expanding the US economy.


Conversely I think its ludicrous that these unemployed workers aren't willing to compete head to head on wages with people who have to jump through hoops to get here in the first place, and still require enough of a wage to get by in a reasonable fashion. Its as if these people want the jobs handed to them on a silver platter.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 5:54:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Conversely I think its ludicrous that these unemployed workers aren't willing to compete head to head on wages with people who have to jump through hoops to get here in the first place, and still require enough of a wage to get by in a reasonable fashion. Its as if these people want the jobs handed to them on a silver platter.


The Department of Labor states that the H-1B law doesn't require employers to seek local talent before recruiting abroad for their US job openings, except in limited circumstances when the employer is considered H-1B dependent:

The DOL's Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2006-2011 (pg. 35) states: "... H-1B workers may be hired even when a qualified U.S. worker wants the job, and a U.S. worker can be displaced from the job in favor of the foreign worker."

The Federal Register, dated June 30, 2006, Section II, paragraph 4, "the statute does not require employers...to demonstrate that there are no available US workers or to test the labor market for US workers as required under the permanent labor certification program."

I'm sorry, where's the competition? Companies like Microsoft don't even have to show that they couldn't find a qualified US applicant at any cost. The H1B program should be an affront to any US citizen and should be repealed.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 6:01:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm sorry, where's the competition? Companies like Microsoft don't even have to show that they couldn't find a qualified US applicant at any cost


If they aren't even bothering to try and find employees willing to work for the rate they'd like, that's a problem. However, I suspect they wouldn't look elsewhere if hungry American workers were offering to work at cut throat rates.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 6:30:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If they aren't even bothering to try and find employees willing to work for the rate they'd like, that's a problem. However, I suspect they wouldn't look elsewhere if hungry American workers were offering to work at cut throat rates.


Other than a significantly lower wage, H-1B can be terminated without severance.

An H-1B worker faces additional obstacles at his/her workplace

Any H-1B worker essentially has the following weakness: his ability to remain in U.S. is directly linked to his current job. H-1B holders can change jobs only with difficulty. In some cases, the holders of H-1B visas find their employers have not completely accurately represented the terms of employment; they find themselves in a foreign land with only a limited understanding of the legal system. H-1B workers can be disciplined at any time, by being laid off: the worker then has to leave U.S. within 60 days (and even these 60 days are allowed only at USCIS's discretion, no days are actually guaranteed by law). The employer has, however, the legal obligation to pay for the return transportation of the laid-off worker. The worker can only avoid leaving the country by finding another employer that is willing to sponsor for H-1B, often impossible in the short amount of time available. If unhappy with the workplace, a U.S. citizen or green card holder can simply quit his or her job, whereas a H-1B's right to remain in the U.S. is tied to the job.

Worker protection and law enforcement

Theoretically, the LCA process appears to offer protection to both U.S. and H-1B workers. However, according to the U.S. General Accounting Office, enforcement limitations and procedural problems render these protections ineffective. Ultimately, the employer, not the Department of Labor, determines what source it will use to determine the prevailing wage for an offered position, and it may choose among a variety of competing surveys, including its own wage surveys, provided that such surveys follow certain defined rules and regulations.

The law specifically restricts the Department of Labor's approval process of LCAs to checking for "completeness and obvious inaccuracies". In FY 2005, only about 800 LCAs were rejected out of over 300,000 submitted.

Basically, indentured servants as opposed to employees. What competition?


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 6:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
If you've noticed, I'm not really arguing for H-1B specifically. I'm just in favor of expanded immigration so more outside talent can become citizens and help grow our economy. If H-1B isn't the vehicle for that, OK. But this country needs something that is.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 6:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you've noticed, I'm not really arguing for H-1B specifically. I'm just in favor of expanded immigration so more outside talent can become citizens and help grow our economy. If H-1B isn't the vehicle for that, OK. But this country needs something that is.


I appreciate your point of view. And if we were discussing this over a beer, we may find out that we agree more than we disagree.

As you probably noticed, the H-1B program is not my favorite legislation. Like most programs, it had it's place in time, but that time has passed in my book.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By Steve1981 on 3/6/2009 6:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As you probably noticed, the H-1B program is not my favorite legislation. Like most programs, it had it's place in time, but that time has passed in my book.


And I can appreciate your point of view on that.

quote:
I appreciate your point of view. And if we were discussing this over a beer, we may find out that we agree more than we disagree.


Life is funny like that. I'm just thankful that our conversation didn't devolve into calling each other idiot and moron.

Cheers!


RE: Then the Senate will....
By lco45 on 3/5/2009 5:47:27 PM , Rating: 2
The reason first world countries stay first world, is that many of the developing world's highest achievers move to first world countries.

Microsoft, like all well run companies, is best served by hiring the best people, regardless of where they're from.
That's why people don't put their birth country on their resume (cv) ... it's not really relevent when applying for a job.

This senator's request would weaken the US, and is not well informed.

Luke


RE: Then the Senate will....
By OCedHrt on 3/5/2009 6:15:40 PM , Rating: 2
The issue is that foreign workers are simply more qualified than American workers.

Microsoft will be cutting foreign workers, just at the same percentage as everyone else. So the numbers won't stay the same, it will just be 5% less.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By rcc on 3/5/2009 7:13:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The issue is that foreign workers are simply more qualified than American workers.


Microsoft evidently doesn't think so. Or they'd set up overseas and hire as many "non american" workers as they want.

Which doesn't mean that there aren't a great many talented people across the globe, just that your statement is er, junk.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 9:20:26 AM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft actions were truly merit based their layoff numbers would not be a strict percentage. And not the same percentage as their current distribution. Over the last 8 years I've personally managed hundreds of H1B engineers. In all but an handful of cases the American engineers were far more qualified and productive than their H1B counterparts. The only reason to use H1Bs is cost. H1Bs are typically half the cost of their American counterparts. When you're competing for work against companies like Wipro or Tata you're forced to use H1B to lower costs.

I fully expect that with US unemployment rising, the US Congress will be forced to stop this immigration program. When they do companies like Wipro and Tata will see their market share of the US software business plummet. Without boots on the ground, Wipro and Tata couldn't sell their services to any US company.


RE: Then the Senate will....
By nbourbaki on 3/6/2009 12:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
If the H1Bs were simply more qualified as you suggest, why is Microsoft using a flat percentage? If the H1B are all more qualified than their American counterparts why would Microsoft keep the same percentage of H1Bs? I can only assume it is to avoid a bad publicity both here and in India. Otherwise, Microsoft's response would have been the layoffs will be merit based regardless of whether they are H1Bs or not.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki