Comment by danielktdoranie
10 hours ago
Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit. Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S. This whole system encourages economic migrants, puts U.S. citizens out of work. As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
> Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S.
This is commonly stated but is not true. US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
However, foreigners whose presence in the US is dependent on their employment are certainly more likely to be abused by employers
0: https://flag.dol.gov/programs/prevailingwages
The prevailing wages are comically low though for most jobs that I've seen (like half of the real reasonable salary for the job we're offering). And employers have the option of 2 data sources so that they can selectively pick the lower of the 2 depending on the jobs they typically apply for.
> US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
This is laughable. I do not know how the government calculates those wages, but as someone who got to US on H-1B visa this year I'm making more than 2x the "prevailing wage" listed on my LCA application.
Just to clarify: my job is a Software Architect, in one of East Coast states, and the prevailing wage listed in my application was $84k. So it is not that my salary is especially good, it's this government-mandated one that is a joke.
I'm lucky, because I came here to work for the same company I used to work in my home country so I got offered good terms (somehow H-1B was easier to get than L-1). If some company offered me a job for the "prevailing wage" I would laugh in their face, but I'm sure for some people that would seem like a lucrative offer.
I just checked my own LCA. My listed (and actual) salary on the LCA is 1.07x the listed prevailing wage, but it doesn't include stock or bonus which are part of my total comp. Including those, my total comp is 2.06x the listed prevailing wage.
I know from talking to my American colleagues that my total comp is around the same level as theirs, so at least at my company they don't undercut US citizens.
Your listed PW does seem quite low, and I don't know how they actually measure it. I certainly agree that companies will do whatever they can to lower wages for all worker, and not including stock or bonus in the prevailing wage is ripe for abuse. Perhaps some reform for this law is in order.
1 reply →
Could it be that the prevailing wage is a national average, ie not adjusted for a high col city? I feel like tech salaries especially must swing a lot between flyover states and big coastal cities.
2 replies →
> Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit.
Why?
It's their money and their business.
What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
> Why?
AFAICT, the parent answered that with "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
Presumably, it's people's business because the US is basically a nation governed by the people who see it as their responsibility to help ensure their basic values (peace, prosperity, life, freedom, justice, pursuit of happiness, etc.). So, when there's regulation that affects the people, it actually is their business.
I'm not a US citizen, but you might find that most US citizens would prefer their government to prioritize the interests of US citizens over foreign nationals. Just as I would expect my home country's government to prioritize the interests of its citizens over foreigners.
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do?
It's called regulation and we do it all the time.
Depends what “can do the job” means, right? Elite tech companies try to hire the highest ability people they can. The US is not a large share of the world’s population, so even if it is massively overrepresented in top performers, the vast majority of top performers are still foreign born. Your position is that US companies should hire less impressive people because they are American. Maybe you can build a functioning search engine that way, so a 100% American-born engineering team can technically do the job, but does it end up being Google? Does it end up being competitive relative to what the immigrants who worked on it would have done in their own countries or a friendlier country?
Most major employers have offices in EU, US, India etc. so the can just allocate racks in those countries.
> helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
Well, that's a woefully short-sighted and zero sum way of thinking.
"an impressive 44.8% of Fortune 500 companies in 2023, equating to 224 companies, were founded by immigrants or their children."
So, it is more accurate to say that the US is abusing and exploiting other countries by stealing their job-creators and thus, jobs.
Source:
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/news/new-report-r....
There actually IS exactly such a requirement to advertise positions in the US and accept applicants. The issue is that it is gamed or done only perfunctorily. What you are looking for is enforcement, which costs money, and goes against the desires of the companies lobbying for such legislation.
It would also help enormously if the immigration was not tied to a specific company, i.e., the worker could jump to a new company at will without having to convince Company-B to do the whole sponsorship process. As it is, (iirc) if they lose their job, they have only 90?180 days to find a new sponsor or go home. This would make it much less exploitative, and also lower incentives for companies to sponsor H1Bs instead of seeking US workers. Write your congress-reps & Senators.
(Source: tech co founder in some companies that did H1Bs, so not sponsoring but managing the workers brought under the process; also competed under a coach that my school took exceptional efforts to get here from Austria because of his world-class qualifications, they still had to really fine-tune the requirements)
100% agree.
It is a race to the bottom that Americans will never win.
Americans who want a normal wage and life are never going to be able to compete on price with someone in South America or Eastern Europe.
This is the kind of things that should result in massive tariffs and extremely onerous tax and paperwork for the companies that do it.
Otherwise, all of our expertise will just move outside of the world and to the desperate abroad. And for what benefit?
This is some weird 'Gangs of New York' wanna be BS. I'm sorry but we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence, it is part of the American project, and it is a part of our strength, not our weakness nor downfall.
My family were the ones told 'no Irish need apply' and now you want me to tell someone else's family off and that they aren't wanted? My family fled eastern europe for their lives but you want me to tell someone else my fear of a threat to my income is more valuable than them? Nah bro, I'm good. Don't claim to be a defender of me/America/Americans. Your type didn't want my family here either back in the day but the USA thrived even with our/my existence. Being American isn't in your blood, it's in who you chose to be. Alway had been/always will be. And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
I'd give every new American a huge welcome hug if I could because they are us and are family. They are your parents/grandparents/great grandparents/etc. Sad that you have forgotten that or chosen to forget because you are scared too 'share'.
Everyone reading this, I'm glad you want to come be part of this great experiment. I hope you chose to stay, it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
>As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
Isnt it the employers exploiting the system?
People like Peter exist in part to help large organizations (including YC) exploit the current system. Peter seems focused on startups - but it's within the same vein.
The parent's sentiment is valid. There's no reason the US needs to import startups - there's plenty here in the US that don't get funding/support/attention they already deserve.
Instead of helping immigrate potential founders - I'd rather see YC do outreach in these other countries to empower/support founders within their home nation.
But, that might slightly diminish YC's chances of funding the next Facebook or something... so here we are.
It also means the next Facebook would benefit a foreign country's economy rather than America's. One reason the US economy is the best in the world is that we import entrepreneurs and their businesses.