analysis of Senate Judiciary Hearing on H-1B

analysis of Senate Judiciary Hearing on H-1B


Date: Thursday, September 18, 2003 6:12 PM




JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER


www.ZaZona.com



Here are a couple of good analysis of the Senate Judicial Hearings from
FAIRUS.org and Dr. Norman Matloff.




Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:21:34 -0700 (PDT)

As FAIR has suspected for some time, the high-tech industry
and
immigration law bar would never sit still for a decline in the
annual
H-1B ceiling from 195,000 to the currently scheduled October 1
ceiling
of 65,000. That mobilization has now taken place. Less than 30
days
following a Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing
generally
sympathetic to serious reforms in both the H-1B and L-1 visa
programs,
Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) held a full
committee
hearing on "the importance of the H-1B program for the U.S.
economy."
Witnesses called for complete removal of the annual ceiling on
the
H-1B program and Chairman Hatch stated that unemployed tech
workers
should not blame foreigners for the loss of their jobs. He's
right,
the public in general and unemployed high-tech workers in
particular
should blame Senator Hatch and the rest of those in Congress who
place
cheap foreign labor ahead of the American worker.

FAIR has learned that in the next few weeks the Senate will
move
legislation to extend for another year the H-1B program status
quo,
but with an annual ceiling of 115,000 instead of the 65,000
level
scheduled to take effect on October 1. The normally sympathetic
House
Immigration Subcommittee had planned to hold a hearing on
reforms
needed in both the H-1B and L-1 program shortly after the
August
recess. Unfortunately, those plans have been changed and no
hearings
are expected until sometime next year, when the scheduled
65,000
ceiling is nearly met, and maximum pressure to raise the ceiling
will
be applied.
This news flash is intended to alert FAIR members, activists,
and
supporters to be prepared to respond to an alert as quickly
as
possible when the timing of Senate movement on legislation
becomes
clear.

Action You Should Take Now:

1. Type your zip code into the "Take Action Now" box and send a
free
faxed message to your Senate and House members. Tell them in
the
strongest possible terms that the H-1B program needs to be
curbed
or eliminated, not made more generous.
2. Follow up your faxes with phone calls. Visit the elected
officials
section of our web site for help contacting your legislators.

Talking Points:

* The H-1B program needs to be curbed or eliminated, not made
more
generous.
* It's outrageous to expand the H-1B program when
general
unemployment is high and unemployment among high-tech
American
workers continues soaring to record levels.
* While the program is intended to help employers find scarce
highly
skilled labor unavailable in the United States, many
unscrupulous
employers are using the H-1B program to replace American's
with
cheaper foreign labor.
* On October 1 the annual 195,000 cap on H-1B visas is scheduled
to
revert to 65,000. No increase above 65,000 as scheduled
is
acceptable.




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norm Matloff [mailto:matloff@laura.cs.ucdavis.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:54 PM
> To: Norm Matloff
> Subject: analysis of Tuesday's Senate hearing on H-1B




> To: age discrimination/H-1B/L-1 e-newsletter


As many of you know, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on
September 16, titled "The Importance of the H-1B Visa to the American
Economy." The title itself is outrageous, as is the fact that the
hearing panel was heavily stacked in favor of industry, with the
industry side outnumbering the labor side by 3 to 1. (I'm told that
CWA, an AFL-CIO union, asked to participate but was refused.)

The hearing testimony is available at

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=913

except for the IEEE-USA testimony, which is somehow missing. (No
accident?) You can get that testimony at

http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POLICY/2003/091603.html

I'm enclosing two articles on the hearing (more articles to come).
Here are my comments.

The first article below, by IDG (likely Computerworld) appears to
seriously misquote the IEEE-USA testimony, assuming that Steadman did
not depart from his written version.

But Steadman urged Congress to look for a longer-term solution to
the
lack of qualified engineers and IT workers than raising the H-1B
cap
again. He encouraged Congress to invest more money in programs
that
encourage U.S. students to study engineering and science. He
also
asked Congress to strengthen the U.S. Department of Labor's ability
to
investigate H-1B abuses, as is required in the U.S. Jobs
Protection
Act, introduced in Congress in July.

This makes it sound like Steadman is conceding that there is a labor
shortage, which certainly is at odds with his statement about
unemployment in engineering. It also makes it sound like Steadman
believes the H-1B abuses are an enforcement issue, when in fact that
central problem is the loopholes in the law. Most employers who
underpay their H-1Bs (i.e. most employers of H-1Bs) do so in full
compliance with the law, and Steadman's written testimony makes this
point. I have not read Steadman's testimony in 100% detail, but I've
done a "thorough skimming" of it, and it looks pretty good (though he's
missed a couple of important points), and is not consistent with the
reporter's quotes here. Steadman does cite the loopholes, for
instance.

Backers of the H-1B program argued Tuesday that the visas
aren't
taking away U.S. jobs, because some technology companies still
can't
find qualified workers for some positions. Ingersoll-Rand has
searched
for more than a year to fill a plastics engineer and an
industrial
robotics engineer position, finally settling on a Canadian resident
in
both cases, said Elizabeth Dickson, advisor of immigration
services
for the industrial equipment manufacturer.

Anyone who believes that Ingersoll-Rand hires H-1Bs due to lack of
qualified American workers rather than for cheap labor should go to the
Dept. of Labor H-1B Web page. The firm hires a ton of H-1Bs, and the
wages paid are in most cases low. There are a number of engineers
listed there in the $40K range, and even some in the $30K range. Same
situation for programmers.

Intel attempts to find U.S. workers before bringing in a
foreign
worker with an H-1B visa, said Patrick Duffy, human resources
attorney
for Intel, but more than half of the graduate students in
physical
science programs at U.S. universities are from outside the
country.

No, Intel does NOT make such attempts. Here is what an Intel manager
who is critical of the H-1B program said (see my updated congressional
testimony for the citation):

It's a matter of what are the mechanisms, how does a hiring manager
in Silicon Valley get a hold of re'sume's? What happens is, you get
a lot of H-1B re'sume's. I had to go out myself, instead of relying
on the Personnel Dept., to go and advertise at several colleges
where I thought I would be able to find some good employees. And lo
and behold, I found a very good one at Cal Poly, Pomona.

Second, the point about physical science graduate programs is a red
herring. In preparation for an forthcoming article, I looked at the
entries for Intel in the DOL H-1B database, at

http://www.flcdatacenter.com/casesearch.asp

Jenny Verderi, Intel's Manager of Education and Workforce Policy, said
(Jim McKay, The H-1B Visa Debate, Government Technology Magazine},
December 2000), "We are not able to find enough qualified U.S. workers
in certain disciplines year after year, particularly in the science and
engineering areas...there has been a shortage in the areas that we hire
at for quite some time--and that's primarily Master's and Ph.D. design
engineers.'' Well, for the year 2000, for instance (the pattern is
similar for other years), only 73 of 218 LCAs filed by Intel were for
design engineers (under a liberal interpretation of the term)--the job
category Intel said was its "primary" usage for H-1Bs.

Furthermore, in its Senate testimony on Tuesday, Intel said that it
hires H-1Bs mainly as design engineers and process engineers. I
discussed design engineers above, so let's look at process engineers.
There is one entry for that job title in the LCA database, and is for a
wage of only $63K--and that is for a SENIOR process engineer! In other
words, Intel is paying only $63K, less than a San Francisco bus driver
makes, to SENIOR ENGINEERS with GRADUATE DEGREES in a job category in
which Intel claims there is a severe shortage of qualified people.

Meanwhile, the LCA database is full of jobs at Intel with titles like
test engineer (salary $42K), Web applications developer ($43K),
planning analyst ($48K) and so on.

And I strongly object to the underlying assumption that a graduate
degree is important anyway. Even a lot of the (non-techie) critics of
the H-1B program buy into that false notion, sad to say. The fact is
that Intel itself has said, for example, that it doesn't have much work
which is appropriate for Ph.D.s.

Steadman and Senator Diane Feinstein, a California Democrat,
pointed
to abuses of H-1B visas and of a related program, the L-1,
which
allows companies to transfer employees from outside the U.S. to
fill
high-level positions. Some companies have used the L-1 visas to
import
IT workers who are then hired out to other companies,
Steadman
charged, and Feinstein questioned whether some companies
employing
H-1B workers were paying the prevailing wage as required.
Numerous
workers in California have complained to Feinstein that they've
been
replaced by foreign workers paid a third of their salary, she said.

Again, the hiring out to other companies is NOT a central issue. What
is the difference whether, for instance, Siemens hires L-1s from India
via Tata Consultancy Services or via Siemens' own Indian subsidiary?
(It's done both.) Either way, it's cheap labor, and critics who fall
into this "secondary employer" trap are basically doing the industry
lobbyists' work for them by allowing the discussion to get sidetracked.

Feinstein's statement, though well meaning and highly appreciated, once
again shows that she doesn't really understand the issues. Those firms
she's citing as using H-1Bs as cheap labor are doing this fully
legally. It's the LAW that has to be changed, and by treating it as an
enforcement issue she is (wittingly or not) passing the buck to the
Executive Branch, when it is a Legislative Branch problem. It
certainly would be nice if she were open to being educated on this.

Senator Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican, said he plans
to
introduce legislation this week to close loopholes in the L-1
visa
program.

I'm told that Chambliss' bill is essentially the Mica bill. If so, it
is worthless, a cruel hoax on the public.

Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, noted that the
sunset of his legislation to expand the H-1B cap to 195,000 will
also
result in the loss of a $1,000 fee per H-1B application, which has
been used for training and scholarship programs in the U.S.

How gullible does Hatch think the American public is? [Don't answer
that question. :-) ] If they really think that fee is important, they
could extend the fee WITHOUT extending the 115,000 cap. And the
training funded by the fee, as I've pointed out before (and as does
Steadman) is basically useless; the employers want cheap labor, not
trained Americans. Remember, the employers are laying off Americans
and forcing them to train their foreign replacements! So who's the one
who needs
training?

Norm


[note from Rob]
article is in previous newsletter, but here is the link:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/09/17/HNh1bhearing_1.html



Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Subscribe or Unsubscribe send an email to









Back to archives