A lot of people are bemoaning this move from the viewpoint in the Valley. I work for an old-school Fortune 250 which is a top-30 H-1B holder. They strategically employ thousands of visa holders for jobs that hardly require a high school education. It seems to be a calculated move to get over-qualified workers at a discount, who have very limited mobility in the job market. From my view here, it's a system that's working against the long-term interests of the country, denying those jobs to local people for whom they would be a huge leg up.
> A lot of people are bemoaning this move from the viewpoint in the Valley.
Even from the Valley perspective, the picture is more nuanced.
Business leaders from the Valley are fully aware of H-1B restrictions on job mobility and take plenty of advantage of it. Particularly the fact that the huge GC backlogs for employees from India and China allows a version of indentured servitude they can take advantage of.
After the 2014 State of the Union address there were plans[1] to provide EAD[2] to people on Greencard backlogs, allowing them to switch jobs with less friction. This was torpedoed by Tech business leaders. Also, notice how little attention Tech leadership puts on Greencard backlogs (and the H4 kids who will age out) and contrast that against the crocodile tears they shed for DACA, Muslim ban etc.
> who have very limited mobility in the job market
The solution to that problem is to relax immigration restrictions to make it easier for immigrant workers to switch jobs so they have more leverage. Not go the other direction and further torture immigrants by making their lives harder.
H1-B visas are for highly skilled workers, either holding higher education diplomas or similar qualifications. They also come with a minimum salary requirement, which for most tech companies would start at $150,000.
Any company paying their visa holders less than the required minimum salary cap, is indeed committing a crime.
Also, this move is obviously directed against tech companies. It does not make any distinction between large IT providers such as TATA, well known for their dumping tactics, and Microsoft, Google, or Apple.
I would even go further to say that, given the lack of interest in banning the entry of seasonal workers, who focus mostly on blue collar jobs, and given that the highest contribution to the rising unemployment numbers come from lower paid service and manual jobs, this is just another move to appeal to the rural, hard right wing Trump base.
As it will not impact them in any significant manner, yet it would create more uncertainty in wealthier, highly educated, urban areas.
> They also come with a minimum salary requirement, which for most tech companies would start at $150,000.
While I understand that my company is cheating the system, this particular requirement is news to me. I personally work with dozens who are probably taking home something in the $70-80K range. I'm guessing this particular cheat is that most are working through Tata and Infosys (and others, but they're local, and would give away who I work for). The company is probably paying the placement firm that kind of money, and the visa holders are getting shafted. The direct H-1B's are higher-level, and, given what I know of the company's salary schedules, may well be getting paid at the bottom of the requirement.
This is what Google has to say about "H1B minimum salary":
"The H 1B also requires that the H-1B employer pay the H-1B employee the prevailing wage or the actual wage, whichever is higher. The prevailing wage is the salary paid to workers in similar occupations in the geographic area of the intended employment. The actual wage is the wage that the employer pays employees in similar occupations at the location of the intended employment.. Since the procedures and record keeping required for the H-1B are complex, an attorney or other trained person will be necessary to complete the paperwork."
Any tech company, and I'm excluding consultancy companies like Tata or Deloitte here, would have their foreign workers coming to cities where other talent is already available, e.g. Boston, New York, San Francisco.
Given that H1-B visa holders are required to be paid a prevailing wage, hiring companies should not be able to undercut local workers' demanded salary.
Now, consultancy companies aren't following the spirit of the law here, obviously, and thus should be punished. Instead, we have got an order that hurts thousands of legitimate visa holders and prospects.
I work for a large tech company (not FAANG), am a visa holder myself. If the Trump administration wanted to go against the actual issue, they would take on the obvious abusers, i.e. consultancy companies. Instead, they chose to leave thousands of high skilled workers on the limbo.
