Judge supports Trump affirmative action for domestic tech workers
As a PhD molecular biologist, I’ve spent my entire career in tech, albeit academic tech. During that time, I’ve had the privilege to work with many colleagues on H-1B visas. I believe in meritocracy, and my experience is that most of these H-1B visa holders were eminently qualified. Were there more qualified Americans out there? Probably. But they didn’t apply for the job, and these folks did. You recruit from the pool you have, not the pool you wish you had.
America needs bright, highly motivated people to compete in technology innovation. The last thing we need to do is discourage the best and brightest from around the world from coming here. We don’t need affirmative action for homegrown mediocrity.
“A federal judge said the Trump administration can move ahead with a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applications, providing a setback for US technology companies that rely on hiring skilled foreign workers.
“US District Judge Beryl Howell said in a ruling Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s effort to radically increase the cost of the popular visa is lawful. The decision gives a boost to the administration’s campaign to restrict immigration and push demand for US workers.”
Lawful? Perhaps. Wise? No.
Why push demand for US workers who couldn’t otherwise compete?
Judge affirms Trump program to support US mediocrity over merit
America needs bright, highly motivated people to compete in technology innovation. The last thing we need to do is discourage the best and brightest from around the world from coming here. We don’t need affirmative action for homegrown mediocrity.
“A federal judge said the Trump administration can move ahead with a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applications, providing a setback for US technology companies that rely on hiring skilled foreign workers.
“US District Judge Beryl Howell said in a ruling Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s effort to radically increase the cost of the popular visa is lawful. The decision gives a boost to the administration’s campaign to restrict immigration and push demand for US workers.”
Lawful? Perhaps. Wise? No.
Why push demand for US workers who couldn’t otherwise compete?
Judge affirms Trump program to support US mediocrity over merit
One problem I know about is that there’s a whole industry of providing low cost tech workers by employment agencies who place multiple lottery entries and use the winning slots to collect from both a foreign worker and an American company for low level tech jobs undercutting US salaries. They often put in generic resumes for H1Bs, then auction the slot so that the H1B hire in the lottery may not be the H1B hire who shows up.
H1Bs have long had two uses. They were used to bring in particularly talented workers and to bring in cheaper workers. This isn’t something new. I followed the issue at tech companies back in the 1980s and 1990s.
Employers want to get the cheapest workers who can do the job, but the H1B law offered salaries limit their labor pool to incompetent Americans who can’t get a better job and foreigners eager for even a low end US salary. As usual when there is a perceived labor shortage, the problem isn’t the shortage of labor but of labor willing to work at the given price. This goes for agriculture, construction and tech work.
It’s not so much about affirmative action as about reinforcing a price floor. I think $100K is way too high, but H1Bs were a good way to beef up the profit margin.
@Kaleberg,
I’m pretty confident that Trump doesn’t mind underpaid workers. Call it a hunch. On the evidence, he prefers not to pay at all.
True too.
True on the last paragraph.
AS the US has a decreasing population reproduction rate, there will be a need for more laborer in whatever discipline.
I expect American Presidents to be looking out for American workers. For me the $100,000 is a pretty good number. It’s low for those workers who Joel discusses as great talents. You get 3 or 4 years out of these outstanding talents and the $100k is a funny story at the bar years later. But the $100k is a real headwind for the “we need 50 bodies to work stuff at $40k less than the market rate for native workers” kind of H1B. And it should be.
@Eric,
So that means wage-driven inflation and/or incenting AI and robots, right?
Joel:
I would call it Overhead.
Ok. . .
The US citizenry is “not” reproducing at replacement rates. This is nothing new.
We hear the same today in the US of employers not finding qualified employees. Much of this is due to lower birth rates and a shrinking population as older cohorts retire and also die off. The result being the US facing similar issues in having replacement population, workers, and workers with technical skills. US birth rate fell to 1.728 in 2019 as compared to 2.01 in 2006 as noted in “300 Million and Counting.”
Who would want to come to the U.S, when the leader of the nation dislikes minorities and people of different cultures?
The second issue is the cost of Labor in a product or in providing a service. Is it the cost of the Labor in making a part or providing a service the issue? Break it down into direct Labor in making parts or providing a service. Direct Labor, Materials, and Overhead. Direct Labor in making a part is the smallest portion today in manufacturing.
Service is a bit different but there still is direct Labor in providing a service.
But back to reality. If the population is shrinking that provides the Labor input, it will become more expensive. Trump’s actions of deportation and discrimination will only aggravate the issue.
Does America Hate Its Children?