Rescued Banks Sought Foreign Help During Meltdown 749
theodp writes "An AP review of visa applications has found that major US banks sought permission to bring thousands of foreign workers into the country under the H-1B visa program, even as the banking system was melting down and Americans were being laid off. The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years. (It's not known how many of these were granted; the article notes 'The actual number is likely a fraction of the... workers the banks sought to hire because the government only grants 85,000 such visas each year among all US employers.') The American Bankers Association blamed the US talent pool for forcing the move, saying they couldn't find enough Americans capable of handling sales, lending, and bank administration. The AP has filed FOIA requests to force the US Customs and Immigration Service to disclose further details on the bailed-out banks' foreign hires."
When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
...people turn to protectionism. No news there.
What they really mean (Score:4, Insightful)
The American Bankers Association blamed the US talent pool for forcing the move, saying they couldn't find enough Americans capable of handling sales, lending, and bank administration.
They're just copying well the tactics of others.
What the above paragraph really means is they couldn't find enough Americans capable of the job, who were willing to take less pay than average, so their costs would be less, and their profit margins would be more.
For the purposes of their requests, people who want to be paid somewhere near the market price for their services aren't suitable candidates capable of the job.
Gives "tone deaf" new meaning (Score:5, Insightful)
Retreats at luxury spas, buying private jets, handing out billions in "retention bonuses" when there are 10's of thousands out of work in the finance industry and the companies are asking for a taxpayer bailout. Then they repay those same taxpayers by trying to hire foreigners to replace them.
It's obvious to everyone outside Wall St. that these people just don't get it. Entitlement has become so entrenched it's a way of life for them.
banks the new sweatshops? (Score:1, Insightful)
This just smacks of wanting to use cheap labor so the pigs at the top can continue to feed at the trough.
So the banks looking for the biggest handouts ... (Score:4, Insightful)
... were also looking for the cheapest labour they could get.
I'm suspecting that you'll also find that those were the banks handing out the biggest bonuses for their executives.
When this disaster is over, I recommend lots of government regulations to ensure that, in the future, none of the banks (or other financial institutions) ever get "so big that we cannot let them fail".
In theory, with the "Free Market", these banks WOULD fail because they were badly managed. Instead, we're propping them up and rewarding their failed management.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I'm a small business owner who despises organizations using H1B visas, since it's only used to get high quality talent at dirt cheap wages.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:3, Insightful)
You think your way of life doesn't depend on getting high quality foreign talent (upbringing and education paid elsewhere) at dirt cheap wages?
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course! It's in the preamble of the constitution. I'd say ensuring fair wages and preventing the exploitation of cheaper foreign workers falls neatly within promoting the general welfare. And the fact is, the H1-B program has been abused wildly for quite a long time. It is rife with fraud and abuse and needs clean-up and re-examination. Putting people here out of work while importing people from outside the country does dangerous things to the economy and while it isn't as drastic as what we already see, it is a needless rise in unemployment which is a tax burden for people such as yourself not to mention the potential connection between higher unemployment and homelessness and higher crime rates.
If there was TRULY a shortage of good people, the companies should do what they did before H1-B -- TRAIN PEOPLE.
Visa (Score:5, Insightful)
stop the xenophobia (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm worried by the increasing number of stories on /. up in arms about companies bringing in *gasp* foreigners. America was founded by non-natives and our economic strength comes from the thousands of immigrants who come here for a better life by getting good jobs or starting businesses.
The contempt for the foreigners coming here on H1-B visas, and the companies that hire them, disgusts me. What makes you any better or more deserving than these people? The fact that you were born in the US? Please. These people have the should have the same right as all of us to come here and be successful. By preventing people from immigrating, especially talented, smart people, we are damaging the future of this country. The ability to attract the best and the brightest to come here is one of our greatest strengths. Erecting barriers to trade and enacting protectionism, especially during this economy, will lead to our downfall as a nation.
The economy isn't a zero-sum game. Allowing foreigners to come here to work enhances their life and the life of those in this country. If you believe you are inherently more entitled to a job than someone from another country, just because you were born here, then you are a xenophobic prick.
Re:It's not necessarily that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Here. (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no "Free Market" as originally described. The people with the money can get politicians to write laws protecting them.
But they keep quoting the "Free Market" when it is advantageous to their position to pretend that it exists.
It does not exist.
So just don't pretend that it does any more and ignore those people who use it to justify their abuses and just make it impossible for any SINGLE organization to get so big that the government has to rescue it.
It's all about privatizing profits while socializing losses.
easy fix. (Score:2, Insightful)
they couldn't find enough Americans capable of handling sales, lending, and bank administration.
The banks could have _trained_ people. It's called 'investing', and banks are supposed to be good at it.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet....they can afford new jets (French ones), they can afford millions of dollars of bonuses...etc.
I've always been against anyone telling a company how much someone could make...and I still to an extent am...but, shit...if the US tax payers are bailing them out, how about a little favoritism to same US citizens for jobs, eh? An exec. making that much salary, with failing times...should not get a fucking bonus, but, use that money to hire US citizens out of work.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:5, Insightful)
No shit, this stuff is really pissing me off.
Look, the federal law is that H1B workers are paid the same as American workers in the same job. These companies are asking for H1Bs because they need the talent, NOT because they want to cheap-out on the payroll. If H1B employees are being paid less, then the company hiring them is in violation of the law. It's as simple as that.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems more likely they had run out of the domestic supply of that particular breed of idiot, and were looking offshore for people with a bare grasp of English and math.
No, I agree with you. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry if I had phrased that like that. My point was that putting money into US citizens at the bottom of the economic ladder gets more taxes generated for the government than putting the same OR LESS money into foreign workers.
That has also been my experience. They come here, live as cheaply as possible, save their money (good so far, right?) and then start their own business back home when they return.
During good economic times and high employment, that doesn't impact the economy very much.
During bad economic times, you're sending money away from the US economy ... and taking jobs from US workers ... and increasing the tax burden on the other workers to pay for unemployment benefits of those workers ... and so forth. The government collects fewer taxes, but ends up with spending more on the unemployed. It's a double hit.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, so does everyone else.
Gonna mandate that public construction be done with US steel, even if the cost is a little higher?
It'll help american companies and american jobs, sure. But then the europeans decide that if you're not playing fair then they won't buy stuff you make, they'll use their own.
Result? We lose out on the global economy, which is largely responsible for the last 20/30 years of growth, everyone pays higher prices and things are no longer done best or cheapest, they're done in isolation.
Re:Ah the 1930's are back (Score:3, Insightful)
The UAW was a disaster, I'll agree, but only because they did in reverse what private enterprises too often do to warrant unionization among their employees. Instead of General Motors exploiting and abusing its workers, the UAW exploited and abused General Motors while their incompetent management ran the company into the ground. (And would have done so with or without the UAW's help.) To brand unions as a universal evil like you do is just as bad as branding them as a universal good.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
You think your way of life doesn't depend on getting high quality foreign talent (upbringing and education paid elsewhere) at dirt cheap wages?
No, as a matter of fact I don't. I'm honestly getting tired of big companies blaming "the U.S. talent pool" for their own failures as businesses. And you're off on another issue: much of that cheap foreign talent comes here to get educated, often at the expense of qualified American students. The GP is absolutely correct: my taxes go to my government, whom I have every right to expect to put the interests of my fellow citizens first. That goes for every country on Earth, actually, so America is no exception. This is all about maximizing profit margins at the expense of people, period.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:4, Insightful)
You can train people all you want, it won't necessarily make them smarter.
My team at work has five engineers and a manager. I'm the only one that was born in the US. Some of them have become citizens and others are here on visas. They are extremely smart and know their shit. There is a shortage of top-notch talent, and the only way for a company to remain competitive is to hire people from outside the US. In my opinion it is better to bring them here to work than to set up an office in their native country (offshore) because the employees make more and they spend most of it within the US. That's a net win.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, that's what I want to know. I'ld gladly take a job at a bank for 65k+ a year while I'm still in school, bankers hours would still give me time for class. And as an applied math minor, and a CS major, I'm sure I could handle these so called difficult positions. But it sounds like they weren't willing to pay the 75k+ a year that folks like me would like
The info on your web site says you have no significant experience in technology, and you do not yet have your degree. Perhaps part of the reason these companies are looking for H1Bs are because there are so many people at your level of experience who think they're worth 75k a year.
Re:What they really mean (Score:5, Insightful)
H1B rules say that you specifically cannot pay them less. An American worker has the right to go to a company, demand the salary, related qualifications and job descriptions. If the American citizen can prove that she is qualified for that position, then the company cannot continue hiring the H1B. In fact, all this information is REQUIRED BY LAW to be posted in a public space in the company (in the bulletin board of the hallway).
There are rules and safeguards up the wazoo about hiring workers with with lower pay on H1B.
On the other hand, H1B sponsorship costs money in application fees and lawyer fees. You'd have to hire the H1B for ridiculously little for the whole system of underpaying to be even worth it and have a way to get away with it.
As far as I know, there has been no major disclosure or legal action against a practice like this. All that has been are stories that people have put up in the web.
The banking industry needs a lot of IT and database people. This is where a lot of H1B hiring goes on I believe.
Re:I want to know... (Score:2, Insightful)
No one makes $65K a year while they're in school in this economy. You'll be lucky to make that much with a Bachelors.
I'm shocked, shocked! (Score:4, Insightful)
Banks making decisions according to financial factors?! Say it ain't so!
Congressmen act surprised because they want their constituents to believe that by bailing out the banks, they're saving the American worker and the economy. But I have serious doubts that any of the Congressmen who voted for the bailout *really believed* that it would create jobs or help the economy.
The problem Congressmen *might* be facing next election is that those workers laid off by the banks receiving bailouts are not the ignoramuses they assume. These workers went to college, took courses in economics, and generally speaking, understand as much about the economy - if not more - than their congressional counterparts. They lived through eight years of the Bush White House, and can recognize cronyism when they see it. They lived through eight years of Reaganomics, and not only do they recognize it when they see it, they know it doesn't work.
And they, like me, are frustrated that the wool is being pulled over our collective eyes. We're frustrated that Congress is rewarding greed and avarice, and trying to sell it as creating jobs. They know better; we know better.
Oh, and that Change that Obama was talking about? Well, our government is going to take your dollars, and leave you with pocket change. Welcome to Democracy.
Re:Visa (Score:5, Insightful)
Or the obvious answer - hire people from the US.H1B visas were designed to expedite bringing in people when there was a legitimate shortage of people to fill a position, not to ensure that employers were guaranteed a low cost workforce. Per the last stats I saw, H1B recipients were making 75% of the standard wages for their professions.
I find it preposterous that a bank was unable to find qualified Sales agents within the US. What they couldn't find was people willing to work for 3/4 of the salary of everyone else in the office.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:5, Insightful)
The reality, particularly in the tech industry, is that non-Americans are leaders in the various fields. Pick up any industry-related journal, and 90% of the articles are by people of non-American decent.
Very true. This is to be expected because America makes up only, what, 4% of the global population? This alone means we'll have only a small percent of the top-talent natively.
We probably have a higher percent in actuality because our wealth allows more people to go to higher education, whereas large swaths of the world are prevented from reaching their potential, either through poverty, health, or non-free governments. This is a huge shame; I can only imagine the scientific progress and quality of life improvements we'd make if everyone were allowed to live up to their full potential.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:3, Insightful)
If there was TRULY a shortage of good people, the companies should do what they did before H1-B -- TRAIN PEOPLE.
But the problem is the wages. For example, say the average American expects to get paid $9 per hour for a job, when they have been trained specifically for that job they expect even higher wages (just look at certifications in the computer world, such as how a Red Hat Certified technician expects to get paid more than a recent IT graduate of the local college). The average H1-B person might expect to be paid $7 per hour for a job that they are already trained at. Its simple economics, if you were looking for a systems administrator for a Red Hat server, do you want the 23 year old thats fresh out of college that expects $80K a year, or the 30 year old experienced sysadmin that is certified and expects only $70K per year.
The problem with most Americans is they won't work for less than a certain amount (and the minimum wage only serves to make that worse) and expect to be paid more after training.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're on to some nativist bullshit here. I have payed taxes in many countries, only one of which I could vote in or depend on "my fellow citizens." And yet, I paid as much percentage of my wages in taxes as any of my colleagues.
Your logic is that taxes give you rights. Well, according to your logic, if they collect taxes, governments should protect taxpayers, not citizens.
Moreover the parent here makes an excellent point: your standard of living has in fact been based on cheap labour for a long time, not just the direct "cheap" labour of H1-B visas.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:3, Insightful)
If you believe you are inherently more entitled to a job than someone from another country, just because you were born here, then you are a xenophobic prick.
What I think is that if a company is receiving American tax dollars to stay in business, it's first obligation is to those people whose money it's taking. Got a problem with that?
And why do oikophobes [brusselsjournal.com] always feel obliged to refer to those with opposing views with terms like "xenophobe", that imply disagreement must some form of neurosis?
first the ibm story now this (Score:2, Insightful)
is slashdot now a bastion of protectionism?
here are your choices:
1. bitch, whine, and moan. sink further into mediocrity
2. shut up, and make your fortune in the NEXT big new thing
apparently, the america of can do attitudes and innovation is being supplanted by loud sniveling voices of priveledge and entitlement
protectionism never works. if there exists some sort of talent outside the borders of your country that can do what you can do for less, simple economics will gravitate to that. either it will be the multinational you work for doing that, laying you off, or if that multinational is blocked from doing that due to protectionist laws, then some other company will capitalize on the cost difference, your multinational will shrink from the competition, and you will get laid off thataways. see? there is NO protection from simple economics and PROGRESS
you are not entitled to the same good job your entire life. no morality, natural law, or sense of fairness exists in which that attitude is supported
tighten your belt, shut up, move on, and make your mark somehwere else
really
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, according to your logic, if they collect taxes, governments should protect taxpayers, not citizens.
Just to be clear here, you believe that a government (in particular, my government) has no duty to protect its citizens? That a foreign national should enjoy the same treatment as someone who has spent his life paying into the system, whose family has been doing the same for generations? And all this because certain large corporations see a way to reduce costs, while simultaneously availing themselves of the benefits afforded by the very taxpayers you so offhandedly disparage?
... wow.
Wow. I mean, just
Re:first the ibm story now this (Score:5, Insightful)
protectionism never works
I wouldn't quite go that far. The U.S. was known as the king of protectionism from Alexander Hamilton's "Report on Manufactures" to the late Nixon administration. So much so that moderate protectionism (i.e., Smoot-Hawley was indeed too far) was known as the "American School of Economics". Henry Carey? Friedrich List? The 'National System'? Have history classes completely been turned over to "America always worshipped Adam Smith" revisionism?
We currently are the least protectionist we've ever been in our history, and are far less protectionist than most of our "free-trade partners".
We moved from colonial backwater to walking-on-the-moon superpower on protectionism. It didn't work?
Sure, if your data center is in India. (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet the executives of those companies using that logic don't seem to apply it to themselves.
That's because it doesn't work.
The foreign workers don't expect to be paid as much because they DO expect to save most of it and then return home where the cost of living is significantly lower.
Now, if the companies want to play that game, then fine. They should be required to move their offices to India or wherever.
Instead, they want to "game" the system by paying to cheap labour rates of India, but enjoying all the benefits of the USofA. Meanwhile they're hiding their assets in the Cayman Islands and such.
Why should the American citizens support their government allowing such behaviour? It's just a race to the bottom.
Re:I want to know... (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree with you 100%. Banks I've worked with will hire Indian workers at 20k to network admin over 1000+ clients. That's a bare minimum 50k to a US worker. It's bullshit. I know about "hard times", but like you said, if it's hard times, then execs shouldn't be getting 7 figures.
Here's a tip for you (Score:2, Insightful)
Try hiring older experienced workers. They'll be more productive sooner, so you won't have to hire as many.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, some education at last! Thanks.
But you create a strawman here.
I quote you:
I never said the govt has no duty to protect its citizens, only that you derive the duty from taxes. Which is insane.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I want to know... (Score:2, Insightful)
I didn't see any Java or C# on your resume either. To get a job at any of the big banks, you need any of the following:
1. Java and some java framework stuf like EJB or Spring and Hibernate .net framework
2. C# and the
3. Be a C++ Ninja with some exceptional Math skills.
Consider this to be constructive criticism if you want to make the bucks in the Financial Services industry.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:5, Insightful)
Honest question - who decides what American workers get paid?
Normally, the free market decides this. A company has to pay me a reasonable salary because I am always on the lookout for something better. There is nothing that prevents me from changing jobs for more money or better benefits.
Where the H1-B system is really broken is that this market dynamic simply does not exist. An H1-B worker must stay at the sponsoring company or leave the country. Most of these workers want to be able to live and work here permanently so they need the company to sponsor them for a green card. This basically makes them indentured servants with no way to leave that company. If H1-B workers were free to go after a better salary, we would not have these abuses. Someone from India or China might take a low salary to get a company to relocate them here, but they will quickly look for a higher salary once they are here.
That has always been my problem with the H1-B program. We bring in a bunch of workers that are easily exploited and that hurts everyone. We need a system where qualified people are given the right to work in our country. If they manage to stay employed for a couple of years, then they clearly have some value and they should be on the fast track to a more permanent worker status.
Re:Blackwater (Score:1, Insightful)
All bank robberies would be utter failures if Blackwater, DynCorp, or Triple Canopy were providing security. There's a big difference between your average rent-a-cop and a highly proficient, former military combat arms, security operative.
But sametimes there would be a few victims of their over-reaction.
ie. Killed 'cause kicked the ATM.
or The client looked like a Iraqui
or Coins bag mistaken as a bomb
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:3, Insightful)
The contempt for the foreigners coming here on H1-B visas, and the companies that hire them, disgusts me. What makes you any better or more deserving than these people? The fact that you were born in the US? Please.
Hate to bust your frail grasp of reality, but US citizens aren't the only people in the world who have a strong sense of nationalism and are opposed to US companies hiring foreign labor to replace domestic labor. The Brits apparently have the same sense of nationalism. [nytimes.com].
So why don't you can your anti-American bullshit now that you've been called out?
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't an issue of preventing "the best & brightest" from immigrating to the US. These are stock jobs "sales, lending, and bank administration".
For each one of those positions, there is surely a US employee who has been busting his or her rear end to be given a chance to work in that position. Not to mention, many of those position mentioned are currently desperately seeking work. Our economy is crashing due to people out of work, receiving little or now pay raises, or in secure about their future income.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000 [bls.gov]
None the less, I do find you opinion interesting & worthy of further discussion.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a company does a web search for you, beware of what they find.
If they don't like it, you won't get called.
The truth is (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies and corporations are going to have to get this through their heads: they complain that workers are not loyal, and that they cannot find enough people who want to work for them. But the reason is simple: they treat their employees like crap and pay them too little. So... they try to hire foreigners who are willing to live in hovels and accept those shit wages.
Of course this is a generalization, and there are some glaring exceptions... some companies treat their employees like royalty. But those exceptions have been relatively few and can be hard to get into. So as a generalization, this is pretty good.
If they want to find good and loyal employees, they are going to have to pay better, and treat people better. And the changes have to start on their side, because employees are NOT going to say to themselves, "Sure, they treat me like crap and pay me poorly, but I will be a good, loyal employee anyway and maybe they will change over the years!"
Excuse me, but things -- and people -- just don't work that way. Normal people take the jobs that look attractive and avoid those that do not... which is why they are not working for those companies that are complaining.
Until employers are willing to treat people better, they aren't going to get better people. Period.
Re:Could I give a tip to my fellow Americans? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
What needs to happen is to turn off the money tit. Okay, $350BN is down the tubes (or did they give out the other half by now?) but this stuff gets everyone riled up when they hear about it. Unlike a lot of the stuff we hate in government on /., this is something that Man On The Street hates just as much. Call your congressmen, and tell Man On The Street that you did and give him the numbers. If enough direct pressure is put on them, they won't keep throwing gasoline on the fire because they don't want to get burned in the process. Everybody wins (in the long run and not painlessly) except for the losers who ran their banks into the ground. Otherwise it's fire and brimstone etc. for much longer, and the fail gets spread around.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm worried by the increasing number of stories on /. up in arms about companies bringing in *gasp* foreigners. America was founded by non-natives and our economic strength comes from the thousands of immigrants who come here for a better life by getting good jobs or starting businesses.
The contempt for the foreigners coming here on H1-B visas, and the companies that hire them, disgusts me. What makes you any better or more deserving than these people? The fact that you were born in the US? Please. These people have the should have the same right as all of us to come here and be successful. By preventing people from immigrating, especially talented, smart people, we are damaging the future of this country.
First, H1-B visa recipients are not immigrants. That's why it's called a "non-immigrant visa". Immigration is a completely different topic, one in which I'd probably agree with you on several points. Here, however, you're off-base, largely because your initial assumption (H1-B visas involve immigration) is wrong. Prick.
Second, I think I'm more deserving of US jobs because I'm a US citizen, not because I was born in the US. As a citizen, I expect certain rights, priveleges, and protections within the US, because those things are a large part of the mandate by which this nation exists.
Among these protections I include preferential status for jobs within the US. This is good for me (I get paid), and for the nation: I pay more taxes than an H1-B recipient, I don't draw from other citizen's taxes by going on the dole, and I contribute to the nation in ways that a foreign worker cannot.
It's worth emphasizing that a potential H1-B recipient who does not get a job in the US does not draw unemployment claims, food stamps, housing assistance, or any of a myriad of welfare programs. An American worker displaced by a foreign one may do so, creating a burden on other citizens.
In terms of taxation, I don't know - and don't want to research - the income taxes paid by H1-B recipients; I suspect it's the same as a citizen's. However, an H1-B recipient is likely to spend more in another country than here, and will therefore carry a lower US tax burden. Even aside from lost potential sales/luxury taxes derived from purchases made int he US, an H1-B recipient is much less likely to buy a house in the States or leave an inheritance here than a citizen. Or any number of other taxable events. I daresay an H1-B recipient, in the long term, pays less US taxes than a citizen of equivalent vocation.
Similarly, any cash spent in another country rather than here can, potentially, drain our economy somewhat. As has been noted, global economics is not a zero-sum game; however, it's also not a free lunch: If there's not enough return for the capital loss at the local level, we (the US) eat a loss. The case in which an H1-B recipient displaces a qualified American worker has no gain in exchange for the cash sent away.
Finally, I'm a veteran, damnit. How many H1-B recipients have served in our military? While many Americans have not done so, most males are or have been eligible for the draft. Many Americans have served on juries. Lots do or have done volunteer work in the US - myself included. These contributions and obligations -do- give us the right to expect benefits within the nation in which we are citizens. Preferential status for jobs in the US is among these benefits.
I've put blood, sweat, and taxes into this nation, and placed my life in the service of its protection. Many Americans, past and present, have done the same. Because of these sacrifices and risks, we, as Americans, have the right to benefit from our citizenships in any way that we, as a nation, damned well choose.
Re:It's not necessarily that. (Score:2, Insightful)
and one important point: the moment you start to turn your anger against the people that's been hired or their behaviour (that's what you're doing), you're on the wrong track. Especially people in the bank business, american people mind you, transfer their money to tax havens, be it via fonds or investments. And yes, especially the middle class does this.
nativist flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What they really mean (Score:1, Insightful)
I am one of those highly paid foreign workers taking jobs away from the American worker. While working in the country (3 years) I have also interviewed a number of job candidates for positions in my field (life sciences), and I have honestly been shocked by the poor quality of their American undergraduate (and in some cases post-graduate) educations. I wasn't entirely confident in my own qualifications until I started working in the U.S.
We have a really hard time finding someone who has the skills that would even allow us to begin to train them for the work we need them to do.
And FYI: I pay taxes like everybody else, and I don't send a dime out of the country. I pay into SS and Medicare, though I'll likely never collect it; so you're welcome.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm also willing to bet that you don't have your nights, weekends, and time with your family interrupted because of something broken at work.
I'm also willing to bet that for every hour worked over 40 a week you get actual compensation for, instead of "We'll make it up to you".
I'm also willing to bet that your company can not just lay off 1,200 workers in a week, without your union getting involved, and garnering some pretty hefty severance packages (if the union lets them lay the workers off in the first place).
Yes, your job is more physically demanding, I'll give you that. But even desk jobs can cause stress.
Re:I want to know... (Score:4, Insightful)
If that's what you got out of the parent post, it says a hell of a lot more about you than the poster.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think what shocks me most is the complete disconnect between the classes. The lower class is surprised that the elite is shitting on them? Talk about heads in the sand. Meanwhile the elite bankers at the top are shocked that they are being scrutinized so heavily. After all, "do you know who the fuck you are talking to?"
I'd be laughing my ass off if it didn't hurt so many people.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Growth? That 'growth' was wiped out in about two weeks when the financial house of cards fell. Some 'growth'.
The last 20-30 years have seen the most dramatic drop in real wages and the hardest squeeze on the middle class for over a century.
Not exactly what I'd call 'growth', more like hollywood accounting and people living on credit in an attempt to maintain their class status. We'll get a look at the real financial state of society in many western countries over the next couple of years. Once people get bumped en-masse down into the lower class and they realise that they are now the people they used to look down upon, they're gonna be *pissed*. Whether the pro-globalist ivory tower intellectuals and/or robber barons like it or not. And when that happens all the strict financial regulations and high tax rates on the ultra wealthy and protectionism that have been chipped away at for last century will be brought back post haste. Rightly or wrongly governments won't have a choice. In fact it's already begun to happen.
Not to mention doing things in isolation has its merits...like providing jobs, lots and lots of jobs, and security both nationally and personally and national self-reliance. Not to mention the skill, knowledge and pride base it builds.
If an operation in the US (or here in Aus) wishes to run the bulk of its operation in a third world country then the executive should have to live there as well. See how long the pro offshoring arguments would carry on for then.
As with everything there's a balance, bit of protectionism here, bit of free trade there whatever's good for the country and your countrymen. Totally closing the borders is about as useful as totally opening them and seems to have the same outcome. But moderation in ideology is out of fashion these days isn't it?
Did anyone stop and look at those numbers? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry... My knee jerk just hit me in the face so hard I lost all ability to reason for a while.
The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years.
We've got our panties in a bunch over their hiring H1Bs at the rate of one one thousandth of their global workforce each year during the fastest period of growth in banking history? Anyone else feeling stupid yet?
21,860 over six years.
So an average of 3,600 a year?
Or, divided across the dozen quoted, an average of three hundred whole H1Bs per bank, each year.
To put that in context, Citibank, not even the largest of them, had around 300,000 worldwide workers. Their lay offs have hit around 10% of that number... 30,000. 300 H1Bs a year is suddenly a very, very small number.
Even if none of the H1Bs moved on during the six years, they'd have hired a total of about 2,000 of them. They'd still have laid off 28,000 non H1B holders even if every last H1B holder had gone first.
Sweet jesus, they're clearly the most evil H1B abusers evar.
And as for talking about how evil they were for hiring these H1Bs over the last six years as the system imploded? It's been falling apart for the last year or so. The other five of those that we're busy lumping in there were (admittedly for bad reasons) the fastest period of growth the banking sector has ever seen.
The constant whining about H1Bs, I'm sorry, is the same pathetic xenophobia and protectionism that kicks in, whether grounded or not, whenever people get scared.
I was disgusted in 2002 as that shameful of human traits was used to justify stripping away the nation's civil liberties. I was disgusted as it turned in to attacking mosques and regarding all muslims as obvious terrorists. I was disgusted as it was used to justify attacking as "unpatriotic" anyone who dared question what turned out to be lies justifying a war that's cost 5,000 American lives. And, yeah, I'm pretty disgusted by it now too.
Xenophobia's pathetic at any time. Massively distorting numbers to make a point that really doesn't exist doesn't help.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Blame your government. What kind of idiot gives money away without oversight into how it is spent?
Re:Could I give a tip to my fellow Americans? (Score:3, Insightful)
And you BELIEVE these resumes from India?
Re:Ah the 1930's are back (Score:3, Insightful)
"And with it, the protectionism and labor unionism that plagued the country for decades. Want to see what happens when the whole US economy becomes like GM ? You're in for a ride."
A strong and powerful society where the middle class held real power and families could easily own a home and live well on one adults wage while and the other stayed at home to raise the kids leading to highly functioning and prosperous nations?
Your right, 1950 to the late 1980s were bloody awful for the average man on the street in western countries thats.for.sure.
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:5, Insightful)
Honest question - who decides what American workers get paid?
Simple. Demand.
Lets say job A has 3 people qualified to do it, but four companies need job A filled, the three qualified people can pick and choose their job. Now, turn to job B, which also has 3 people qualified for it, but only one company needs job B filled. Now, it's the company who can pick and choose who they hire and for how much (or how little).
Yes, this is amazingly simplistic, but it's really quite spot on. When you start looking at this sort of stuff on a global economy scale, yes, it gets a whole lot more complex, but the principle stays the same. Jobs in high demand will earn more. Somewhere above was an example of a qualified Red Hat person leaving college wanting more than an experienced sysadmin with years of experience. Guess why that is? Because right now, lots of companies have decided they need red hat qualified workers. Bingo, sellers market - and the people with red hat who can sell themselves will be making a killing.
In Australia, a funny thing happened about five years ago. We pretty much ran into a shortage of tradies (that's local talk for plumbers, sparkies, brickies etc etc) and the ones who were in that field started to make an utter killing. There were even numerous news stories and articles about the new class of working elite. Yes, the guy hooking up the pipes in your new home was earning $150k a year. The guy fixing the cement slab for your house, he was making much more than the lawyer doing your legal paperwork to buy the house.
Now, companies can of course try to exploit rules in a market. In this case, big banks worked out that they might be able to hire people cheaper by using this sort of working visa. Just means that there is less demand for that sort of worker really. It's a buyers market for this sort of work.
Now, when you start adding more complexity again with "how much does a worker want for a particular type of work" you once again get into yet another kettle of fish. For example, I work in an office doing a business analyst role, but I wouldn't take say a job moving lawns for the same money. I don't like mowing lawns. Sure, I could do it, but for me to do that every day, I would expect to be paid considerably more. I also wouldn't really want to take a job working in a fast food outlet. Now, as it happens to be, those jobs pay less than mine - that's because a lot of people are willing to do them, and can do them for less than me. In global terms, these banks are taking advantage of the fact that they can take workers into a role for less than the average American wants to be paid for doing that job. It's not that there aren't any Americans who don't want to do that job - just not for that amount of money. If the bank can make use of a way to have the job filled for less than an American wants for it - seems to be playing fair. Maybe not patriotic, but fair.
Now, having said all this rather longwinded stuff, I am of the general opinion that you end up getting what you pay for. I advertise roles within this team at above the minimum wages but hire very selectively. This means I get someone who is a better worker for the role - and mostly people who want to do the role well. Paying above the other people advertising the same type of role really lets you pick and choose who you want - it turns any role into a buyer's market.
Re:Despite myself (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Minimum wage has been planned to make an increase for at least the last year, if not two or more. Personally I do not agree with it but whatever, off topic.
You know I used to agree with the whole minimum wage being unnecessary or even bad thing. But honestly a compromise needs to be reached on the whole issue.
Agreed that no minimum wage would help people get jobs they otherwise wouldn't have, and possibly help people learn a new skill in a job that later maybe they can move on to a better job. But the sad reality is, when times get tough people will often literally sell themselves into slavery, we see it with many alien workers, Hispanic and Asian, coming here as indentured servants only to live as slaves. Personally I think as a society we should have moved past that... With modern technology an individual can produce way more than he will consume (given minimum surviving consumption obviously). The people who reap the rewards of this increased production are the owners every time...
But I also agree that people who want to work for less than minimum wage, be it a teenager just getting their first job or someone wanting to learn a new skill yet not volunteer to work for free, compromises should be made. But that's something we need to figure out. Wholesale abandonment of our principals of treating people with dignity on the other hand we should not be so quick to compromise on.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a bad example because it is already a protected industry - what you descibed happened years ago. Even "free trade" agreements have conditions in there that the other countries cannot sell steel, wheat, sugar etc to the USA. It costs more than imports since there is no need to price it to imports anymore and there is no drive for the protected industry to improve price or quality. It's one of the reasons why there has been little spending on government infrastucture in the USA for a couple of decades, steel is expensive. There's not much of an export market due to the higher cost - and due to the nature of US coal being higher in sulphur than most places - often lower quality as well. Eastern europe can produce higher quality steel more cheaply since they have better coal and the technological advances that kept the US ahead in efficiency no longer happen. Why bother to waste money on R&D when you have a government mandated captive market?
The boat has already been missed. It's time to swim to shore as best as can be done.
Re:Despite myself (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't think financing an education is a problem? The average debt out of undergraduate programmes in the US is some 30-40 thousand USD, and you that's just for those who can come up with enough loans? And that's just a peanuts BA/BS. Professional degrees will leave you an average of 100 thousand USD in debt. Do be realistic; this is not a viable system. The graduates are sometimes stuck with those loans for decades.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's kind of like oil: we go for the cheaper source of energy hoping that the consequences of doing such don't eventually bite us in the ass. Unfortunately, they do.
Re:What they really mean (Score:3, Insightful)
Of the candidates I talk to.
I have no control over if Americans can't manage to figure out how to get their resumes through HR.
Re:Could I give a tip to my fellow Americans? (Score:3, Insightful)
Another AC telling us that we Americans are inferior employees. Seems there are a lot of such posts in here. Are we being astroturfed? Why is this particular one rated so high?
He so much wants to hire us, but he doesn't. Says it's all our fault for writing crappy resumes, not working hard enough, and not doing school right. Theory isn't good enough, he wants practical experience. Apparently our schools aren't giving us good guidance, and a degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Is all this believable? It smells, that's for sure.
Re:Despite myself (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is, none of those "theories" were Capitalism. They were forms of pseudo-Capitalism designed to maximize consolidation of market players [anti-competition/pro megacorporations too big to fail] and form legally protected Oligopolies.
Real Capitalism with government oversight guaranteeing a large pool of players in all markets is something the US power brokers fear the most.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you give them too much credit. They'll never be shocked. They will be bankrupt and on the street homeless and still be fighting for the rights of the wealthy to continue screwing them.
Look at Joe the Plumber.
The idiots in this country who believe that hard work and long hours alone will make them 8 figures some day. The idiots who believe that their success is the result of their hardwork and their hardwork alone--that they don't owe anybody anything. "You're going to take away MY WEALTH!" When they have no wealth of their own.
Everybody in America dreams of winning the lottery or working hard and building a business which is going to make them millions. And when that happens they "sure as hell aren't going to pay to keep some lazy ass mexican to sit home and watch cable." They're all deluded that someday that millionaire will be them.
Are the rich and succesful by and large hard workers and productive members of society? Sure. Absolutely. But are they 100,000 times more useful to an organization? Are they 100,000 times more productive than a replacement? No. Our entire pay structure has gotten bent out of shape. Who pays the salaries of a large bank? The board. Is the Salary coming out of the board's pockets? Not really. What do they care if they pay their CEO 10 million or 11? And if the CEO makes 11 million then it only seems fair the board pays itself 2 each.
How can you rationally set the salary of someone who is your boss? How can you rationally set your own wage? No wonder it's completely blown itself out of proportion. You can't tell me there isn't someone out there who is a business genius who is willing to work for $1million a year. Based on the performance of the auto industry it's been obvious for over a decade you could take any manager in the corporate office and put them in power and get just as good of results.
We've gotten to the point now in these large organizations where we're paying 50x the price for .01x times the extra gain. But that's the American dream. Someday "I too could be that super over priced executive." Someday "I too could be that movie star." Someday "I too could be that lottery winner." And when that day comes! I don't want to pay the government a million dollars a year in taxes!
Mod Parent Up (Score:5, Insightful)
The GP argument implicitly assumes that there is some fixed amount of work available, and that foreigners coming into the country somehow "take away" their work, or deteriorate their salary. I can assure you that, if anything, I am more expensive than a local (I get the same wage, but my employer paid a bonus to get me here. Also, I am stricter about taking all of my paid leave and not working overtime than the people around here).
The sad fact is that while the markets have become global, most workers still don't want to live global. It's just as easy for an American to get abroad as it is for an American company to hire people abroad. So why are Americans so hellbent on staying put? It can't be the standard of living: Many European countries offer a better deal than the States when it comes to work-live balance and purchasing power.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:4, Insightful)
No. No, it won't. That's the problem. It'll help American *steel* companies and American *steel* jobs, but the higher cost paid for steel will result in more companies and more jobs harmed elsewhere. The problem is, the benefit is concentrated and obvious. The cost is diffuse and difficult to see.
And, incidentally, once US steel no longer feel competitive pressures from outside, that "little higher cost" won't stay so "little" for long.
Free-trade arguments don't need to be based on retaliatory protectionism from other countries. Protectionism is bad nobody *what* the other country does.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:1, Insightful)
i think you should get your facts straight. most international students (incl me) who came to the US either got scholarships or research/teaching assistantships because of the quality of research/teaching they do. And if you take the time to notice, many of these students go on to teach, guess what?.. the NEXT generation of AMERICANS. In any top university in departments like EE, foreign students easily surpass their 95% of their peers in their classes. So, perhaps this concept eludes you, but why shouldnt a portion of money go to students who actually are good enough to get a scholarship and do better in their classes than most other american students? Also if you pause for a moment to think about it, being born in the US is an accident of nature. Why is it that people actually seem to think that being a burger flipper in the US qualifies him/her to a better quality of life than say a doctor or faculty member in any 3rd world country? And just to be clear, a lot of my good friends are Americans, and I respect them because of their competence. Nothing more nothing less. Judging a person on his/her skills may be new to you, but get used to it. As the song goes: "The times, they are a changin"
Re:Could I give a tip to my fellow Americans? (Score:5, Insightful)
He said he's hired these guys - you'd find out quite quickly if they've been spinning you a load of BS. But don't let facts get in the way of prejudices.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:4, Insightful)
You would have a point if american schools were all state-run schools which exclusively admitted students due to academic merit alone. That is not the case and the american way of handling access to higher education is through the price of admission. So if the foreign students pay their tuition or get scholarships like americans do then they have as much right to be there as anyone else.
Moreover, if your colleges and universities weren't desperately seeking for foreign talent to enrol in their school program then they wouldn't spend their valuable funds on foreign recruitment programs, such as the recruitment program that MIT and Carnegie Mellon are running on the university I've enrolled, along with other top schools of my country.
Re:When the going gets tough... (Score:4, Insightful)
Once they are legal then the employers have less of a stick to hold over them and demand they work for low pay. This raises the minimum price of labour, which has a flow on effect for other jobs.
Effectively you move the entire workforce slightly up the scale from low towards middle class, improve everybody's standard of living, and give the economy a much needed kick in the arse.
Isn't that how it worked back when the USA was building its superpower status? "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,"....
Re:I want to know... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am sorry but thats what comes off free trade....i dont remember too many people complaining when this meant mega corporations getting unfettered access to developing nations and repatriating their profits back to shareholders in Europe and the US.
Free trade means precisely that : Free movement of Goods,Capital and Labour.
For years we have had cheap goods off the back of chinese labour and booming economies with access to new markets for our mega corporations.The chickens are coming home to roost,Comrade!
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Any power sufficiently concentrated is a threat to our liberty, not just government. This applies to any organization or individual.
Having said that, government is a necessary evil in our current social and economic framework. We try to mitigate it's downsides by making those in power accountable through various mechanisms. I'm not arguing for bigger government, but rather to put effective safeguards on government power, and to use this power when necessary for the common good.
I would very much prefer that I have a direct say in where taxpayer money gets spent. Right now, a large chunk of this money is spent on bailing out the financial industry (whom I may add spent considerable sums of money lobby for less oversight of themselves for innovation's sake). It may not be the best system, but the taxpayer does not want to see public money being spent frivolously by individuals and organizations that have been proven to be irresponsible in the past.
You say you have a fundamental problem with wealth redistribution, but in fact do you? You have a problem with the government redistributing your wealth, but do you have a problem when it is private persons doing is? For their own gain?
The market surely is a wealth redistribution system, but it is not perfect and prone to abuse, as can be seen currently even though in many cases it does work well. I for one, am glad that there are people in government that are willing to temper our tendency to idolize the market. Not to dismantle it, put to prevent power being concentrated in those that abuse it.
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
<devilsadvocate>
H1B visas mean the people getting hired are living in the same country, and probably the same city as the US worker you mentioned, these jobs are not outsourced overseas. How is it then, that these people can survive on $20k yet a local worker needs $50k? Is it a matter of expectation or actual need?
</devilsadvocate>
Note I'm not saying that it is correct to undercut citizen's but how do you we make the case that $50k is necessary as a living wage when the employers can point to the H1B visa folks and say "See, they are doing just fine at less than half that amount"? How do you win that argument?
Re:No, I agree with you. (Score:4, Insightful)
I argue that foreign workers will live extremely frugal in the US while sending the bulk of their earnings back to their home country.
And how many foreign workers do you know? I'm a former H1-b turned Green Card and I can assure you I have a wife, a house, and two cars and I'm spending all my money locally. The foreign workers who live frugally are the ones whose future here is a big question mark because they've been waiting for their green cards for 8+ years with no end in sight. Give them green cards and they'll settle down here.
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Are unions such a great resource when others benefit but suddenly turn into something awfully negative when it applies to you?
No - they're like a lot of other things. A fairly good idea that gets corrupted by human involvement.
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Everybody in America dreams of winning the lottery or working hard and building a business which is going to make them millions. And when that happens they "sure as hell aren't going to pay to keep some lazy ass mexican to sit home and watch cable." They're all deluded that someday that millionaire will be them.
Are the rich and succesful by and large hard workers and productive members of society? Sure. Absolutely. But are they 100,000 times more useful to an organization? Are they 100,000 times more productive than a replacement? No. Our entire pay structure has gotten bent out of shape. Who pays the salaries of a large bank? The board. Is the Salary coming out of the board's pockets? Not really. What do they care if they pay their CEO 10 million or 11? And if the CEO makes 11 million then it only seems fair the board pays itself 2 each."
Well, one thing you keep mentioning...becoming a millionaire on salary. That's the error I see in your argument.
There's and old saying that you will never get rich working for someone else. That is really true 99% of the time.
In the US, if you want to be rich...you gotta work for yourself. Incorporate and get out there on your own....entrepreneurial spirit and all. Invent something, consult, contract yourself out...etc. This is where you make money. Is there risk? Of course, most people that are wealthy take risks to go along with that hard work,etc.
And lastly....you don't have to be a millionaire to be rich. To many people, making 6 figure salaries is rich to them. I've found that I've amassed most of the fun 'toys' I've ever wanted in life, and aside from one or two new ones a year...I don't need a ton of money.
As long as I have a fun car and motorcycle, a cool place to live, I don't have to keep track of what my grocery store bill (or bar bill, or restaurant tab) will be and just know I can afford it.....I'm happy. I think with me personally, that is what I'd say is 'rich' to me. If during my daily life, I don't have to worry really about what price things are...know that I can afford to do what I like to do....I am rich. (of course I also mean this AFTER I've put money back for savings and retirement, etc)
Re:stop the xenophobia (Score:2, Insightful)
Lets say job A has 3 people qualified to do it, but four companies need job A filled, the three qualified people can pick and choose their job. Now, turn to job B, which also has 3 people qualified for it, but only one company needs job B filled. Now, it's the company who can pick and choose who they hire and for how much (or how little).
If the supply of IT workers is relatively low, the demand side of the equasion will drive up wages to the point where more people enter the field or re-enter the field. If you increase the supply, the wages regardless of where they were before, will decrease. H1-B's increase the supply in a system, which even IF the H1-B workers are paid the same, will decrease wages for all. H1-B's even IF they are necessary WILL drive down wages. And they have the added bonus that since the jobs pay less that what a smart guy can make if he chooses a less afflicted profession, the US supply continues to dwindle [slashdot.org]. This will either cause an increase in wages OR, you guessed it, mandate the need for more H1-B visas.
The guy fixing the cement slab for your house, he was making much more than the lawyer doing your legal paperwork to buy the house.
I would be much happier with this situation. I don't think legal paperwork is that hard (ianal) or should justify great pay. But tradies do a lot of hard work usually for not a lot of pay. This at least seems more equitable. Now as for the hard work the lawyer put it when the plumber was slacking off in school.... how hard was it? just is justify the difference in lifestyle? Maybe, and certainly knowing what the outcome of your effort would be would affect you chosen profession -- lawyers are reasonably bright - If they knew that they would have to go to school for 8 years and study hard all the while amassing debt just so they could earn half as much as a plumber that dropped out of school... I think there would be fewer lawyers (which might just drive of the wages again).
For example, I work in an office doing a business analyst role, but I wouldn't take say a job moving lawns for the same money. I don't like mowing lawns.
I think the the lawn mower example is spot in. Certainly for the perspective of - it is what it is. Wages for work are where they are - choose your profession accordingly. It's just that a sudden external supply change can really knock you feet out from under you after you have committed to a given profession.
I advertise roles within this team at above the minimum wages but hire very selectively. This means I get someone who is a better worker for the role - and mostly people who want to do the role well.
It's relatively common for two mid-level developers ( or entry, or senior ) to have drastically different skills levels. We'll call that "value". Yet despite that fact that one developer may provide two or three times the value of the other less skilled developer, it is very unlikely that the better developer makes two or three times as much money.
Re:Gives "tone deaf" new meaning (Score:3, Insightful)
More like tens of thousands of talented, hard working people who spent the last 20 years dreaming up more and more ways to steal money from the rest of the world. I'm sure there are lots of "good" people in there, but their industry has managed to engineer the biggest financial crisis since 1929 (which, by the way, was also caused by Wall Street). They only "contributed" so much to GDP because they are so good at creaming off big chunks of other peoples' work.
Selling sub-prime and alt-A mortgages to anyone with a pulse and then packaging them up, fraudulently arranging for AAA credit ratings on the packages, and then selling them off for obscene profits is not contributing to the nation. Enabling leveraged buyouts where the debt ends up back on the books of the purchased company, while investment bankers take home millions, is not contributing to the nation. Paying off politicians to change the rules that were put in place after 1929 to prevent a repeat, is not contributing to the nation.
And lining up for taxpayer-sponsored bailouts when it all falls apart is just adding insult to injury. You think people are mad now? Give it another year.