And another type. Canadians with TN-1 status (and Mexicans with TN-2) will typically switch to an H-1B in order to apply for a greencard. I worked in the US for about 8 years on TN-1 status, and then switched to an H-1B for the 6 months it took to go through the accelerated greencard process.
The xenophobia also seems a little over the top on this issue. With the rather broken American education system, is it so unbelievable to people that there may actually be quite a few non-Americans that are simply better qualified for these jobs?
> With the rather broken American education system
If the American education system is so broken, why do so many Canadians travel south to attend American colleges and universities? My wife certainly did, to get her law degree.
> is it so unbelievable to people that there may actually be quite a few non-Americans that are simply better qualified for these jobs?
That isn't unbelievable at all. However, our immigration system, as broken as it is, serves a different purpose. The H-1B visa is meant to fill jobs that cannot be filled with domestic talent. Not jobs that can be filled with superior talent. A fine difference, but still a difference.
Personally, I'm for eliminating all this visa nonsense and allowing anybody who wants to come here to do so. Then again, nobody asked me.
I also think the US education system is "broken" or close to it. Remember the recent polls saying 40% of Americans don't believe in evolution? Something is surely wrong with this picture.
It is not until college level that the US performs better than other countries. And then (for the majority of people) you would need a scholarship to be able to go.
K12 education has poor results and above that it is economically broken.
e: I don't mean this as an attack, I just want to say I can see where the grandparent is coming from.
> Remember the recent polls saying 40% of Americans don't believe in evolution? Something is surely wrong with this picture.
Yes. You actually believing that statistic. Seriously?
> It is not until college level that the US performs better than other countries.
That depends on how you define performance. If you define it by creative endeavors and behavior, I would say that's patently false.
How is it that such a poorly educated populace produces the most vibrant culture and economy on the plant? Must be a miracle.
> And then (for the majority of people) you would need a scholarship to be able to go.
The overwhelming majority take out loans or work their way through. At times, parents help out. Occasionally scholarships pay some of the way. Very rarely does a scholarship cover the entire tuition.
I do believe it. We have governors that publicly don't accept global warming as well.
> Re: Education
It's not the education but the market that creates "the most vibrant culture and economy". That's why some of those contributing to our culture and economy came to do so from abroad.
> Re: Tuition
My point is still that it is quite a large burden, whether or not one manages to delay or share the burden.
I'm not sure that it's so much "xenophobia" as the fact that companies are pretty well-known to be abusing the H1-B process right now to avoid hiring qualified Americans. The advantages for employers are quite strong, not least because H1-B holders have far less mobility and are essentially at the mercy of the employer.
I'd like to see a credible source for this. There are references to a handful of shady companies misbehaving, but I have yet to see hard facts or credible stats (I'm not saying they don't exist). On the other hand, I have seen a lot of xenophobic hysteria and comments from American "IT professionals" whom I certainly wouldn't want to work with.
In my own experience, my employer is struggling to find qualified people. We are a fast-growing startup in LA and simply cannot scale as fast as we would like (mail me if you want more info). There is no shortage of foreign applicants but, afaik, I am one of only two sponsored H1B employees.
Individuals with an H-1B can transfer employers under the AC21 rules. Many people with an H-1B simply don't know it. There's a lot of information from AILA here: http://www.aila.org/Issues/Issue.aspx?docid=12647
The problem with a transfer is that you could "reset" the employment based green card process, putting you to the back of the queue, and adding several more years, and uncertainty to the process.
If you have a GC petition under processing, and switch jobs by transferring the H-1B, at the new job you will have to start the GC processing all over again. Nonetheless, you can transfer the "priority date" (PD) from the first (abandoned) GC petition to the new one.
This piece of misinformation cost me many years, so please don't spread it. I waited too long for the "right job" to come by and wasted many years. I could have started the GC petition at the first opportunity and transfered the PD as I switched jobs.
As mentioned by another poster, you can switch jobs if the EB category stays the same.
In that sense, you do have to wait for the "right-enough" job, where they employer is willing to agree to you categorize you in EB2 or EB1 if you have a PHd.
In addition, companies/lawyers take their sweet time preparing paperwork. Which means:
PERM application in process? Can't switch jobs from 3 months to a year or more. My PERM took > 1 year to be approved. Others I know took more time.
A H1 transfer or PERM can also be autited for no good reason, and waste time for people. An audit will discourage people from switching.
I140 in process? Should I switch and waste time invested in PERM?
You can technically switch, but there is plenty of FUD to give people second thoughts.
You can only transfer the Priority Date (PD) if you have got your I-140 done with the old company and you maintained the same classification when you filed your new labor certification (LC) with the new company (EB2 -> EB2, EB3 -> EB3 ok, but EB3 -> EB2 not ok).
Your last two sentences are spot on... I am guilty of it too.
also most employers have no idea how to accomodate transfers. They're scared by any prospect of extra paperwork or even worse, consulting a lawyer. If the H1B holder was free to move about from job to job as easy as a greencard holder, then all indentured servitude and low wage abuse would cease overnight.
There are not nearly enough qualified and affordable senior level programmers in the country. We tried to hire them. Most candidates, that are senior on paper, do suck, they can't solve even medium complexity problems.
Unless you have a crazy budget, you will spend a loooong time interviewing and going through one shitty candidate after another. We've interviewed close to 60 people, hired 3 (NYC). One of the 3 turned out to be a rat who delegated all the work to other developers, and had to be let go.
In cities like NYC or SF, you need a very high salary to attract true talent.
With "accelerated greencard process" do you simply mean the greencard process as it exists for people that are already employed in the US as opposed to the slower / more uncertain process for people that, for example, use the Diversity Lottery or that are employer-sponsored but not already in the US?
I am not sure how it works actually. I know the Labor Certification part was skipped entirely and I was put in some higher priority queue. Whatever they did, it took just under 7 months from start to finish.
Don't forget H-1B isn't the only VISA you can hire people under.
If you want to hire from Australia, there is a VISA that is roughly equivalent called the E-3. It has a cap of 10K, of which less than 3K are filled yearly. This is the VISA I have.
Not saying you will necessarily find the people you need down under (if you cannot find them in the US), but it is possible :)
The biggest problem with an E3 is that it's only 2 years and when you get on the ground in the US its virtually impossible to get a credit card from major banks, and few insurers (health and assets) will touch you. On my second renewal, still no credit, ho hum, it certainly disincentivizes spending any money here or considering any kind of future beyond professional and material. Maybe that's the point tho, go figure. I would certainly like to not send every cent of savings offshore, however.
I'm currently in the US on an E3, and while it is true that it is rather hard to get credit/insurance/a car when you first arrive, it does get easier. The trick is to start building your credit history from day 1: get a couple of secured credit cards and keep them paid. It'll take a few months for your credit history to even show up, and over a year for it to be any good, but it will happen. Credit Karma and Credit Inform (which you get for free with a Capital One secured card) are good tools for tracking your progress.
You should definitely have a decent amount of savings when you move over though, to offset the lack of credit.
This is a little off topic but need to have a whine about secured cards - I had two simultaneously with wells fargo and bank of america for 12 and 6 months respectively and always in the black. When trying to "upgrade", was then bounced for being on a temp E3 visa as part of some magical policy at both banks they failed to enlighten me to in the sales pipeline.
E3 is a nice idea but dealing with some of life's basics can be grueling in the US if you're off the system. It's not difficult to imagine how people on the street here can't get out of the hole.
Credit Unions are the way to go, no doubt, but took a while to figure that out.
Yea, it's not easy. I'm paying far, far too much for a car and insurance (can't wait to move to a city where I can ditch them) and only just got my first "real" credit card after being here for 12 months. It gets very frustrating when you're treated as a total nobody even when you have significant assets back home.
Have you tried Citi? They do all kinds of multi-currency accounts, have seamless overnight inter-country transfer etc. and are reasonably flexible. Only downsides are that they'll include your Australian Citibank accounts when reporting to the IRS, and they're monolithic.
Not Australian so don't know much about the E-3, but it seems Canadians have a similar visa (TN-1) - indefinitely renewable also.
The trick is that it's a non-resident-intent visa, which is to say, while it's indefinitely renewable on paper, at some point USCIS is going to point out that you've been here for an awfully long time and you risk the renewal not going through.
It's relatively new (2005) so I doubt that has come up yet. I believe it's even more relaxed than the TN class visa.
I do know of an E-3 holder who had their residency fast tracked, but there have been so few of them issued that it's probably a bit hard to tell the lay of the land.
TN-1 for Canadians would be much more comparable to the E-3 for Australians than the H1-B1 for Chile and Singapore as the H1-B1 doesn't allow dual intent and is only valid for one year.
Would Australians in general have strong preferences about parts of the US? It would seem like the "stronger tech community" argument works IFF you're in Silicon Valley, not so much if you're in North Dakota....
Which locations in Australia are the best to visit for recruiting (specifically for network/infrastructure/security types, not so much mobile apps/social media.)
The big cities: Melbourne and Sydney. You might get some joy from one of the other state capitals (Perth, Adelaide, Hobart, Darwin, Brisbane), but your best bet would be the big two.
The tech community in Australia, while close knit and growing, has nothing on San Francisco (but honestly, where in the world does?). There is also the lure of other big, well known cities, particularly New York. Australians love to travel, and coming to the US is pretty expensive, so perhaps pitch it as a way of being close to north and south America?
That's why I'm here. I don't plan on returning to Melbourne until I've lived in San Francisco and New York either. It's a hell of an opportunity once you're over here.
I study finance in Sydney, am graduating next semester and knows how to code too! Rare to see someone in similar situation on HN! Send me an email (see my profile) maybe we'll have more to talk about. :)
Yeah, currently I am still learning to code, but I have lots of ideas that I want to turn it into reality. Its interesting..how I am graduating soon in UNSW of bachelor of commerce, done some investing and trading, and find out coding is really what turns me on. Add my email and twitter as well, I am sure there is lots of things we could talk about.
Your email isn't public; Can you paste it into the
"about" field? (or you can send an email to me instead if you don't want yours public) I don't use twitter so I can't add your twitter name.
I might be potentially getting this one soon too (fingers crossed). One thing though it's a non residency visa, as in you can never use it on the path to become a resident.
As a former H1B, I would like to point out that there are two types of H1B candidates: ones who got a degree here or are switching a job from an outsourcing company and seeking a American employer and the ones who are placed as a part of a larger team by an outsourcing company. The former are a part of a self-selected pool of risk takers. If you are a running a start-up, you are better off with the them as they have the mental toughness to withstand risk.
Bodyshoppers - Faux consulting companies that recruit H1B workers from overseas with promises of a life in the US and a Green Card and place the "consultants" at US corporations to fill developer positions. Usually while they are paid the "market" rate as per DOL guidelines the companies sometimes deduct "fees" from the salary for the first year or so giving the candidate not much to live on. The green card never materializes and the candidate is usually threatened with having to pay back all the fees if they leave. Some are really good candidates who come into the US this way and usually jump ship as soon as they can if they can find a US company to sponsor the H1B. There has been a crack down on this over the last several years so body shopping isn't as common as it used to be.
Outsourcers - Companies who specialize in transferring work development overseas. "Consultants" come to the US on a H1B for year or so to learn the process and systems then head back overseas to setup the development team offshore. Was very in vogue a few years ago but seems to have slowed down as more companies realized it doesn't work as well as advertised.
The third category is companies who genually are seeking the best candidate for the position and cannot find anybody locally. Really these companies should be sponsoring the candidate for a EB1, EB2, or EB3 green card however the process takes too much time (1-2 years+) and doesn't give the company as much leverage over the candidate as bringing them in on a H1B. If you are coming in on a H1B these are the companies you want to work for, but make sure you get any promises for Green Card sponsorship in writing otherwise it probably won't happen.
Err, and then there are the people from outside the US that have applied for a job with an American company in the usual manner, have been selected as the best candidate for the position, then need a way to legally relocate to the USA and do the job...
That's usually not how it works. I can only tell from my experience on what happens in Inida, but you usually apply for a "consulting" company which is basically a front for a shop that takes 30-50% cut in the developer pay by sponsoring them a H1 and sending them out to companies that need developers. A part of this is faking the number of years of experience they have on their resume, completely faking the technical expertise etc.
US govt. has kinda caught up to this and is rejecting many H1Bs that were sponsored by consulting companies now. So make of that what you will.
I don't have any evidence that you're not correct in general, but that's certainly not how it always works. I (British) worked for six years for Apple under the program (2001-2007), and there H1 holders - from all over the world - were treated (and hired) in exactly the same way as US employees. They just want to hire the best candidate.
Go after the abuses of the program, yes, but it's not fair to many good, valuable people in the USA on visas like this to imply (and you may not be trying to imply this, but it's the impression many people come away with) that it's all abuse.
48% of H1-B holders are from India, and another 10% are from China. IMO, it should be illegal to hire them in a capacity where they are "consultants" in a shop. This would shut down the vast majority of the abuses in the system.
I'd be the last to argue, though, that the US immigration system is a good one. It seems to tolerate any number of unskilled illegal migrants on one end, but pretty effectively bar educated, skill migration on the other. I'm no economist, but that intuitively seems to be the wrongly skewed to me.
I've come to the conclusion that the H1B operates in two parallel universes that have almost nothing to do with each other. On one side, you have companies like Apple and Google, trying to hire very talented people, often graduates of top American universities. They see it as absurd that the US would keep these workers out, and they have a point. I also believe that these companies treat their H1B workers more or less the same way they treat their US Citizen workers. There is a slight difference, of course, in that the greater restrictions on mobility do have an influence on wage negotiations and so forth, even when both parties are acting in "good faith." But all in all, when you look at this first universe, you wonder why people are complaining about the visa - in fact, it's so baffling that you start to wonder if the complainers are just "xenophobes".
On the other extreme, you have extremely abusive "body shops" where employers think nothing of threatening to revoke a visa to manipulate a worker. I think that many people who work for the first universe were a little shocked to discover that the biggest recipients of the H1B visa are generally overseas outsourcing companies.
If you're interested in reading more about serious abuses of the system, I'd recommend reading some of Ron Hira's work (a public policy professor at Rochester) - he did an interview on NPR a while back where he discussed some of the really outrageous cases (some H1B recipients were paid less than $9/hr and met the "prevailing wage" requirement... how on earth can this be happening with a visa designed to remedy shortages of "critical, highly skilled and educated workers"? And how is it that google is running out of visas when we're allocating them to companies paying such low wages!)
It's fubar. The US badly needs a solution, but there are so many competing interests that it's difficult to find a common ground. There is some outright xenophobia. There are people who don't really like immigration, and want to limit it wherever they can. There are companies that want to lay off their entire IT department and replace it with non-citizen workers who can't negotiate their wages. There are engineers who feel positive about immigration in general but resent a specific program specifically brings in more engineer, on the grounds that there is no greater a "shortage" in engineering than any other field, at least when you consider wage growth. There are people who support very liberal immigration policies and figure more is better. There are people who think it's crazy to tell graduates of top STEM programs that they aren't allowed to stay. Some people say that we should staple a green card to every graduate degree in a STEM field (but interesting, not to every law degree or MBA, degrees that are more popular with Americans...)
Unfortunately, the result is stalemate and a program that nobody likes, but everyone uses, because how else are you going to do this You work with the system you have.
My own opinion is that we should make every effort to keep and attract top talent to the US in all fields, but we also need to be aware that the market distortions of visas targeting specific types of workers can, if we're not careful, end up deterring Americans from entering specific fields (creating a self-enforcing cycle of "shortages"). I think we can balance this with good legislation (and the countries that "solve" it will have a big competitive advantage over everyone else), but it's a tall order considering the many angry and conflicting interests around this issue.
Oh, no way. I'm a H1B holder myself, but I'm just saying that there is a LOT of abuse of the visa going on.
I have some amount of sympathy for the consulting companies as well. I've seen cases where my friends got CS degrees from University of Pennsylvania, who I know are very good, but can't find a job right out of college. (The day your degree is done, the US policy is to kick you out unless you get an intern with some company or a H1B sponsorship. No grace period.). At this point, you're forced to go to the consultancies, get trained in whatever enterprisey tech stack, fake your resume and then accept whatever ridiculous terms the companies throw at you, work for them for a couple of years and move on once you have your foot in the door.
So.. all I'm saying is the policy needs some change .. I'm just agreeing with my parent that it needs to be easier for grads from US universities.
A significant portion of the program is abuse. If you look at the total number of H1Bs issued (several Million), vs the the number of H1Bs working in "top 100 or 1000" companies like Apple, Google, MS, AMZN etc, what remains is the vast majority who got H1Bs through body shops or out sourcing companies.
Many H1B holders start with shady companies but eventually move to better places. Not sure if that's always a good thing.
Agreed. And they also belong in the former category -- they are taking a risk and moving from away from their comfort zone.
My point was H1B candidates of the former type have self-selected themselves into a pool of skilled risk takers and could perhaps be an asset for a start-up. But your mileage will vary.
As for the latter category, you are not really hiring an employee ; you are merely hiring a vendor . Buyer beware !
I hope Congress realizes that restricting the immigration of highly qualified tech workers has unintended consequences.
If I can't hire good programmers in America I'll be tempted to open an office in India. Once I open an office in India, I have even less of an incentive to hire people in America. With less employees in America, my company is spending less on services in America. My employees are buying less things. The people I didn't hire in America don't need houses in America. Real estate prices suffer.
Silicon Valley is an amazing place. Immigration restrictions are unnecessary friction. They are protectionism for college graduates who should be able to compete on their own (if they can't, wtf were they learning in college?). If you gunk up Silicon Valley you are basically priming the ground for the emergence of rivals. That seems unthinkable now, but only because we are all sitting in Silicon Valley and we aren't watching what is happening abroad.
Programmers can grow up anywhere. They can learn anywhere and with AWS, App Engine, etc. they can deploy their services cheaply from anywhere. Soon kids won't need VCs to launch companies. The proximity to Silicon Valley for funding's sake will be irrelevant. It'll be the tech community that will be the draw. If the best people aren't in Silicon Valley because immigration rules stopped them at the border, then there will be competing communities in other nations. Where living costs might be cheaper. Where the weather might be better. Where the abundance of beautiful women (and men) might be higher.
What happens to Silicon Valley real estate when tech work moves to other locales?
I've been thinking of moving to the Bay area for a while from the UK. Everyone I follow / engage with seems to be there so it seems like a good place to go.
One thing I'm hearing though is that companies are not that interested in hiring H1B candidates (at least for design) - I'm surprised that the increase in take-up is due to tech companies. Any Bay area companies able to comment on this?
I really did not feel that. I just graduated in the UK and will move to the Bay area in fall (when H1B starts). All the companies I talked to were totally ok with H1B.
This is just plain wrong in my experience. Even small companies (< 15 employees) can easily get an H1B petition approved if they apply before the cap is filled and pay a lawyer ~$2k.
This hasn't been true since the recession. Also when the cap limit is hit a lottery system is used to select petitions. No companies have preference.
In fact the rules now are that they will include any petition received within the first five business days in the lottery. The rules are a little more complex than this, but it's essentially correct.
Any reasonably good lawyer knew they had to get things submitted on the first day due to cap uncertainties.
The ~100 ish person startup I work at has many h1b employees. The hiring company has to be willing to spend a few thousand before hiring on immigration lawyers.
Some of them were big companies and one was 20 employees startup. I assure you they knew exactly what H1B is and they simple engaged with an immigration lawyer (see replies).
As someone on H1B in Silicon Valley because of a rare, hard to find set of skills, I find it deeply insulting that every time this discussion comes up, it's always about money. But for people who just aren't sharp enoughs, I guess blaming something else than themselves is a convenient exit.
Stop complaining and sharpen up your skills folks, we're living in a global world with global competition on all levels. American companies can't afford to hire B talent just because they're "americans" (whatever that means, many americans I know are immigrants 1-4 generations back).
Meh. I have an H1B who makes about 25% more than the rest of his team in the same office because the prevailing wage is higher than my company's standard wage. It cuts both ways, depending where you are and what industry you're in.
Lots of People don't know that applying for H1B Visa is not getting the work permit/Visa to enter the country. Tech Companies like Microsoft file the Petitions even if they don't really utilize/invite people in the current year. This is just to keep a pool of extra workers on stand-by. Out of the 65k ,how many will get approved by the USCIS and how many really qualify in the Visa interview ?. How many enter the US in the current year? Remember your visa is valid for 6 years so they can utilize it in the future.
Slight correction -
The visa is not valid for 6 years. The H1B visa that is granted to you at a US consulate abroad is usually valid for up to three years. (sometimes two) i.e. you have till that expiry date to enter the US.
Once in the US, you can extend your H1B status for up to 6 years (and more if you have a pending 'green card' process)
In my team(at a company in SF bay area), We have tried to hire an entry level engineer and also a senior level engineer who can tackle software development. We've not been able to fill any position with qualified candidates.
Only reason is that the supply of jobs is abundant. Though there could be a huge number of american engineers, it simply doesn't match the demand at present. There is nothing terribly wrong in education system in the USA. The way you can solve this problem is by telling every freshman to major in Computer Science (However, many tech jobs don't require CS degree), which is not possible.
> " The way you can solve this problem is by telling every freshman to major in Computer Science"
I don't think that'd fix it - we're not really short on CS grads, we're short on CS grads that can write software. That's part of the xenophobia and hostility against H1B's - you have a lot of CS graduates who are just plain not very good programmers, who feel slighted that they're being passed over in favor of an international who's actually competent.
Would you be willing to post the salary you are offering, along with some information about what you consider to be a qualified candidate? Absolutely fine if you want to keep it general, I'm just curious about what people mean when they say they can't find a qualified candidate.
One big problem I have with the H1B visa is that it was created in response to an alleged "shortage". I'm very enthusiastic about creating a general skilled immigration under a points program (like Australia or Canada), but I'm far less enthusiastic about specific visa programs designed to remedy shortages in a particular and narrow segment of the economy. As you can probably tell, I'm one of those people who doesn't really believe that "shortages" of workers exist in a properly functioning market. I wouldn't rule it out completely, as we don't have a true free market and there are externalities to consider, but in general, I think most companies talking about shortages are really just having trouble hiring at the rate they want to pay.
Double or triple that salary, and you'll get your engineers. If that's too expensive, then maybe the talent you seek has just found higher value things to work on. One extremely regrettable aspect of the H1B is that it restricts mobility. Yes, changing jobs in related fields is possible and common, but an H1B holder can't stay on that visa to go to med or law school, start a new company, or respond rationally to all kinds of market signals they way free people in a free economy would be able to... and the ugly truth is that this is part of the appeal of this visa to some companies - a captive engineering workforce with all the market distortions that brings.
FYI, we could not hire anyone. Finally, we lost those open reqs because management decided so. Most smart engineer we interviewed, ended up having multiple offers from more cool companies.
it would have been 85k-95k for an entry level. In short, it was up to the standards in bay area for skills and experience.
What kind of salary were you offering for the more senior position?
Do you think you would have been more successful hiring a Jr dev at a much higher salary? Say, 120K? That would still low for a graduate of a top law school.
I know this will cause sticker shock, but that may be what it takes.
Honestly, I do not have salary data. However, for sure, the salaries were in average or above range.
You should check some salary stats. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3141716
It seems to me that there is a disconnect here. You mentioned that you were losing out on "smart engineers" with "multiple offers from cool companies". Then you discuss how your company is offering salaries in the "average or above range." It sounds to me like your company is experiencing exactly the outcome you'd expect.
The part where I see a disconnect is when you mentioned "Though there could be a huge number of american engineers, it simply doesn't match the demand at present."
I see this as a function of supply and demand. I haven't studied economics formally (beyond the examples in my math classes), but I understand that economists talk of a demand curve and supply curve. At lower prices, consumers tends to demand more of a product or service but producers supply less. At higher prices, produces have an incentive to supply more but consumers tend to demand less. The point where the supply and demand curves meet is considered the market equilibrium.
Right now, it sounds like prices (salaries) for engineers haven't hit equilibrium. 80-90k may sound like a lot, but clearly the economy is demanding more engineers at this level than the market will supply. I don't know where that equilibrium point will be, but considering the number of very lucrative career paths smart people have available to them, I suspect it's going to be quite a bit higher.
Well, this debate is getting a little stale over a few days. The disconnect is in the phrase "at this level".
You can always find a salary point at which any good or service will appear to be in "shortage". And you can always find a salary at which there will appear to be a glut. Sounds like there's a big shortage of 80k/yr engineers, but absolutely no shortage of 160k/yr engineers.
Good. H1Bs are abused by employers who refuse to pay the prevailing wage and lie to the government that they "can't find anyone at the prevailing wage."
The IEEE had it right when H1Bs were first expanded: don't give H1Bs at all. Instead, give greencards so that if the wages are below market the employee can immediately jump to a company paying the actual prevailing wage.
No, it doesn't; the cap applies only to new H-1Bs. You can extend your H-1B for one more term of 3 years. If you apply for a GC in those 3 years (if you haven't already) and reach a certain stage of the processing, you can get extensions past the 6 years. If you do not apply for a GC, you will have to leave the country after 6 years.
No. Once you have an H1B, you're good. You can extend it, and apply for a green card and have it be valid beyond six years while you wait for your response.
After your 6 years of H1B are over, and if you decide to leave the country for 1 year, and then reapply, then you will have to go through the quota again. Unless laws change by then, of course.
I have a roommate who just missed the deadline and is trying to figure out what her options are (background is in image processing/medical imaging)--she had an offer, but the process is rather long going from J-1 to H1...
So what if the supply is exhausted. It's a synthetic shortfall driven by a smoke and mirrors view presented by companies that don't want to pay decent wages.
There's no shortage of quality tech talent, never has been. Now go show me a quality company.
Luckily there's no unemployment problem in the U.S., because if there was, the H1B program would just be a way for companies to hire employees at well below market wages, further depressing the U.S. economy.
These aren't liberal arts majors here. The recession doubled unemployment among programmers and electrical engineers, but that means that they're up to 2.4% and 1.6% now. The US demand for STEM majors has been growing steadily, but the number of people graduating in STEM majors has been decreasing steadily over the last decade.
Degree is not necessary in tech business. Ellison, Gates, Jobs all dropped out of college. The people that teach themselves and have a "go get 'em" attitude tend to do the best. Perhaps a little on the job training is all we need to compensate for the "steady decline".
Companies want to recruit 'unicorns', people who are absolutely perfect for the job. People that they don't have to train and can be parachuted into a position and be 100% productive from day one. They want an XXX or YYY developer, not a good general purpose software engineer who can learn new things quickly.
Such 'unicorns' either don't exist or are rare enough that they can command a premium in salary that most companies don't want to pay.
So instead of recruiting someone who is competent but needs some training (say recruiting a good Java/C developer and sending them on a training course to learn Ruby), they would rather whine that there is a shortage of software developers and petition for more H1Bs.
Wage discrimination based on visa status is illegal, though. Before a company petitions for an H1-B on behalf of a foreign worker, they first have to apply for a labor certification showing that the worker's wage is close to the mean wage for that job title in that region.
What is most likely happening is that once the foreign workers get their H1-B visas, they are denied raises and bonuses. And since their staying in the US is contingent upon their employment, they don't have much negotiating power.
Wage discrimination based on visa status is illegal?
No it's not.
Theoretically employer must pay "prevailing wage" ( legal types conveniently ignore the fact that increasing the supply of labor lowers the price of labor - Econ. 101, supply and demand, check it out ...).
There's nothing preventing an employer from saying, "well I'm paying what I think is the 'prevailing wage'. I have two "equally qualified" employees: one a U.S. citizen and the other a guest worker visa. I'm giving a bonus to the citizen but not the guest worker".
Welcome to global labor arbitrage, specially targeted at your profession. Big software wins. You lose!
<< There's nothing preventing an employer from saying, "well I'm paying what I think is the 'prevailing wage'.>>
The employer does not determine what the prevailing wage is. The US Department of Labor does. Prevailing wage = the mean wage for that position in that region.
But there are a 100 ways around it. In fees, expenses, supplying you housing and a car as part of the deal, or simply not paying you what it says on the W4.
You don't like it? You're fired - now you have 12hours to get out and to the airport before we call the INS
Sure, but why would an american advocate that Microsoft spends its dollars in another country? Wouldn't it be better for american economy if that person could migrate to US, earn big bucks, pay taxes on those bucks and spend the rest of the income buying goods and services from other US residents, propping the whole economy up?
As an aside:
Bill Gates doesn't own Microsoft.
Bill Gates is not Microsoft therefore he isn't a monopolist.
You cannot be "convincted" of being a monopoly. Monopoly is a state of being, not a criminal act. Microsoft was found to violate Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Which, of course, has no more bearing on the discussion of H1B visas than the fact that it provides gainful employment to 92 thousand of people, most americans (i.e. a good thing).
The rich are getting richer on this deal and that includes Bill Gates (who may or may not be the multi-billionaire chariman of Microsoft and largest stockholder).
Regardless, if this hypothetical "person who could migrate" is so good, he'll earn big bucks and pay taxes and spend his income on services and goods ... some of which will come from America. If we need tax money so bad in order to "prop up the whole economy" then maybe we can have some modest import taxes like we did for the first 160 years of this country.
This "trickle down" theory using Guest Workers doesn't seem to be working for dedicated American Moms and Dads.
To put it in perspective: Grow the damn tomatoes in Mexico, no need to subsidize California agriculture. Pay the local pickers the market rate.
"I'm giving a bonus to the citizen "
But that has nothing to do with visa status. Many employers choose not to give bonus to US citizens as well. Bonuses these days are something that you should feel lucky if you actually get any.
Before a company petitions for an H1-B on behalf of a foreign worker, they first have to apply for a labor certification showing that the worker's wage is close to the mean wage for that job title in that region.
Those mean wages are way, way off base though. When I first arrived in New York three years ago the mean wage provided by the certification was $45,000. I do not know a single developer on a salary that low.
The xenophobia also seems a little over the top on this issue. With the rather broken American education system, is it so unbelievable to people that there may actually be quite a few non-Americans that are simply better qualified for these jobs?