What are HR1044/S386? A few questions.

Jul 11, 2019 105 Comments

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?

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 105 Comments
  • Google 武当派
    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”.)
    Jul 11, 2019 19
    • Amazon NotTecLead
      Is Walmart any better...
      Sep 19, 2019
    • Oracle cc’ed
      Oh google (the one with Chinese characters), I salute your sense of entitlement!
      Sep 22, 2019
  • Google / Eng 😁😁1
    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.
    Jul 11, 2019 7
    • Amazon senat
      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.
      Jul 12, 2019
    • IBM SWbc36
      Because Indian national abuse H1b that’s why s386/HR1044 so “fair “ to them but not others.
      Sep 20, 2019
  • Apple / Eng Marijuana
    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.
    Jul 12, 2019 17
    • Bloomberg lowlowtc
      Then maybe come up with a bill that increase India GC quota only, why take others?
      Jul 12, 2019
    • Apple Wharton
      I have no idea what you're trying to say. If you're suggesting that the total number of employment based green cards be raised over 140,000 per year, that is also politically impossible for either party.

      I think you ROW folks haven't been here long enough to understand how politics works in America.
      Jul 12, 2019
  • New l@st
    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?
    Jul 11, 2019 6
    • Amazon senat
      The immigration system isn't a "market", if it was (eg, if we selected people in order of comp) there wouldn't be a problem.

      I don't get your obsession with "fair", the immigration system isn't a human right, we are supposed to be getting the best people and we aren't. This bill will make it even worse, with lower quality people coming.

      I don't want to be "fair" to meritless people, I want to prioritize the best. Waiting longer doesn't have a damn thing to do with merit.
      Jul 12, 2019
    • New l@st
      So who gets to make the judgement on merit? The companies that make the hiring decisions operate in this free market. It's as fair as it gets. If these immigrants made it so far, they are qualified. Perhaps they do not meet you personal standards, and that's fine.
      Jul 12, 2019
  • Flagged by the community.

    • Flagged by the community.

    • TripAdvisor whattheth
      Is flagging normal comment an Indian thing? Lol
      Jul 15, 2019
  • GoDaddy ComeMommy
    Simply put, in the next a few years, only Indians will get GC
    Jul 12, 2019 5
    • GoDaddy ComeMommy
      Fair? Indians are not the only group paying taxes.
      Jul 12, 2019
    • I think I buy the tax argument. Rank the applicants by the total amount of taxes they have paid waiting. Remove country caps. Highest overall payers in the queue get GCs first. It helps companies like Google hurts staffing companies!
      Jul 14, 2019
  • Amazon senat
    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.
    Jul 12, 2019 4
    • eBay yejekr
      Corporations want to make more profits that’s why they bring consulting companies. Of course quality would be compromised for that. Talk to Bezos or other CEO regarding not bring outsourcing companies. Solve the root cause instead of band aiding it.
      Jul 12, 2019
    • Amazon senat
      That's a good reason to oppose it. We don't want that.
      Jul 12, 2019
  • Marvell harald
    I understand and empathize with folks saying diversity would be greatly affected..but current wait times to get GC for EB 2 Indian workers is > 100 years !! These guys and I don’t think majority of this category is low skilled, can forget about their GC’s ! This doesn’t make sense at all ...Clearly, the system is broken for high skilled Indian migrants, no matter how you spin it...is it fair to penalize them because of low skilled Indian migrants ? I don’t think so..All I can say is, INS/USCIS needs to have better filters at H1b granting time so that high skilled and low skilled categories are clearly separated...
    Jul 12, 2019 1
    • Netflix AQhA27
      Correct. Highly skilled Indians should be working to fix low skill migrant problem. Instead, they push for S386 which rewards those low skilled immigrant. If country of birth does not define merit, how does getting in line first defines it ? Do you choose first doctor that shows up in your in-network list or you check reviews and then select ? I am all for merit based immigration but not for this S386 crap.
      Jul 12, 2019
  • eBay yejekr
    @OP if your concern about GC merits check my reply.
    Jul 12, 2019 6
    • Amazon senat
      The low quality consulting people can't crack Amazon interview so no. Amazon will find it harder to hire if this bill passes, or we will have to lower our standards
      Jul 12, 2019
    • Ericsson MCDan
      @senat do you know Amazon supported this bill? What do you think all smart legal, HR didnt think about hiring problem before supporting it
      Jul 14, 2019
  • Facebook bl@ckmamba
    All these triggered Indians - It’s not about it being fair for you, it’s about what’s best for America.
    If we remove per country caps it would take a decade for nurses for work in the US. Rural areas in the US have a shortage of nurses and they aren’t eligible for H1B.
    The US couldn’t give a damn on how fair the process is for Indians. It’s about how their country would benefit.
    Jul 31, 2019 3
    • Facebook bl@ckmamba
      I dont need to read the link. The source itself tells me it’s going to be propaganda.
      You have been misinformed my friend.
      Aug 1, 2019
    • Facebook bl@ckmamba
      It is propaganda because the publisher of the article is Immigration Voice which is same group lobbying for HR1044. Hardly a neutral figure.

      Would you believe what Breitbart says?
      Show me a reputed publication and I’ll believe it.
      Aug 1, 2019

Salary
Comparison

    Real time salary information from verified employees