What are HR1044/S386? A few questions.
Why do people care? People on blind usually don’t care about politics, and they just care about TC. I read both bills. I have some questions: 1. People say it will only benefit some specific groups, and hurt most. I don’t see it. It seems fair, right? 2. Why do we only change the way of distributing GC, instead of increasing the number? Who came up with the bill in the first bill. 3. Why does diversity matter? 4. How will it affect US tech industry? 5. Will it lower wages?
1) it is fair. 2) it's a 15 year old bill by Rep Lofrgen. 3) diversity doesn't matter in employment GC. There is a specific visa for that it's called diversity GC (duh!) 4. It will increase tech wages. 5. If will increase wages, since a more mobile labor force will increase wages for all. Time and again studies have said that a more mobile labor force increases wages.
Because so far only 1 country has priority date back in 2009 due to their own outsourcing consulting industry issue. If this bill passed, then starting from 2022, any new EB2/EB3 GC applicants from the rest of the world would have to wait for at least 6 years before USCIS could finish granting GCs to huge amount of nationals from that single country who submitted applications during 2009 - 2021. Consequences: 1) all major tech companies could then be dominated by workers, managers, directors and senior execs from one single country. Not every company promotes diversity as those big ones in today’s Silicon Valley, so employees from a single country could form an inner circle such that it could be very difficult for people from other countries to get hired or promoted; 2) H1Bs from other countries who started working after 2022 could risk using up the 6-year H1B term and be forced to leave the US (re @Marijuana: think about that if they get a PIP or layoff in the 5th or 6th year, and cannot jump ship quick enough with enough time left to redo the PERM-140 process, this is NOT “fake news”.)
Good observation. While I agree that people should not wait more than 10 years to get GC due to the origin of nationality, undermining ROW’s opportunities to get jobs is also unfair. Not sure what would be a good and balanced solution to this issue though. Automatic GC for all approved i-140? Look at Canada
Anyone with an approved i140 can extend H-1B beyond 6 years, so your second point is fake news.
So are you saying country of birth trumps meritocracy? You would rather hire a candidate from RoW to improve 'diversity' over a better qualified candidate from China, India or Mexico?
How would you justify ‘better qualified’? I am just curious. I personally think that everyone should get a fair shot.
This bill doesn't create a merit system and will result in LESS merit. That's because about 60% of the India backlog are from consulting companies and are very poor quality. So those low quality applicants will get greencards while people with merit wait ten years. If it was a merit system it wouldn't be so unpopular.
1. Yes it is fair. Whenever you end a discriminatory system, those who benefit or feel entitled to benefit from that system find equality to be oppression. 2. It's important to understand that immigration is an ongoing debate, so nothing can be done that makes any stakeholder feel like they lose cards in ongoing negotiation. Raising the number of skilled green cards might not be something Democrats would want to allow to pass the House, unless they also get some concessions for dreamers, chain migration, or whatever other type of immigration they want. 3. Diversity of employees in the workplace is important. Do not conflate who works at the company with who gets green cards. If every Indian national at Apple gets a green card overnight, that will have zero change to Apple's diversity numbers tomorrow. The current system encourages employers, particularly bad ones, and also hiring managers at faang companies, to hire more Indians and Chinese keep them indentured for long periods of time, because their labor-market mobility is constricted until the employee receives a green card. Hiring managers love employees who are less likely to leave. 4. There will be new startups launched by people who have a long track record of success in the US and are finally able to freely do so once they get their green card. 5. It will increase wages because it increases job mobility for a critical mass of employees who are currently not able to move freely between jobs. Restricting job mobility depresses wages, this bill does the opposite. Additionally, if the Senate agrees to the amended version (The amendment adds sections 3, 4, and 5 of https://www.dropbox.com/s/tcqv5zwcv095pc1/S.386_Amended_Section_by_Section_Analysis.pdf ) then: The amended version will be even better for wages, because it adds transparency through the online job portal, strengthens enforcement of labor laws, and makes it harder for the scammy lower paying staffing firms to get visa approvals going forward. This will be overall good for the US tech industry, except for the bad staffing firms.
Interesting. How would you debate with the Chinese-name guy from Google above?
That person is wrong about so many things I don't know where to begin. Maybe let's begin with what is actually true, which is: Starting 2023 (not 2022), it becomes a first come first serve system. People who apply in 2023 or later, whether from India or Russia, join the same line and get their green card at the same time if they are equally qualified. The wait time would be roughly 4-5 years (not 6), because the existing line will take that long to clear out. So apply in 2023, receive in 2027-2028 regardless of country of birth. That person seems to not like the fact that between 2023 and 2027, the people receiving green cards (i.e. exiting the line) will be for the most part Indian nationals who applied between 2009 and 2022. But that's only because people from other countries who applied since 2009 have already gotten theirs! Let's also take a look at what that post declares as "consequences": (1) Everyone getting their green cards sooner as a result of this bill is already working in the United States. Many of them are managers and directors. Do not conflate who gets green cards with who gets to come and work in the United States. (2) I already debunked this, there is no "6 year limit" for folks who are waiting in the green card line.
I was just curious why OP guy is too much worried about it ? Do you already got your GC ? Let tell you a fact here. If you want to fix the GC give aways there are around 1 millions green card is giving away for people never paid taxes or social security and they get it for free. Back logged people are 15 years in the line and payed close to million dollar taxes and still waiting for the GC. While every year millions of people coming to USA and paying no taxes and get it for free. So what you think , you need to worry about ?
Simply put, in the next a few years, only Indians will get GC
In other words people already waiting for 15 years and paid close to millions of taxes.
Well for employment-based GC they said so. People above said it would be fair since it’s due diligence to Indian applicants because they would receive GC later than those from ROW who applied the same time?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_OPAN2WkAIFdTt?format=jpg&name=large
If you want to oppose this bill you NEED to call your senator and complain Look at all the posts getting flagged, there is an organized cabal of bullies who want to silence the majority of people who oppose this. Over 60% of the backlog is consulting applicants who have little merit and should never have gotten into the US. It will create a ten year wait for everyone, and the backlog will only grow because it does nothing to limit the number of applicants or increase the number of visas, so before long it'll be a 100 year wait for everyone. It makes absolutelyno progress towards merit based immigration And here's the kicker: due to spillover, India is already getting around 46% of all the visas, far beyond their 17% of world population, and these are mostly low paid workers who undercut and lower local wages.
@OP Do you mind the merit of 1 millions green cards giving away that directly impacting labor market of Americans?
I don't follow your question, if you're talking about family based immigration I'd like to see a greater focus on employment immigration but under no circumstances do I want to see us rewarding these abusive consulting companies. To move visas from family to employment we should have a merit system.
You are asking people to send you PDFs to answer your long questions