As an H1-B holder you have to jump through many hoops, including constant attention to your command of the language. How does it feel to be judged? :)
More importantly, why would you expect more from a foreign applicant that from a local? The point is there shouldn't be discrimination, in either way. H1-Bs are for specialty occupations that are in high demand to begin with. Not sure what encourages you to be more catholic than the Pope.
> As an H1-B holder you have to jump through many hoops, including constant attention to your command of the language. How does it feel to be judged? :)
I never brought up language issues, that is your hang-up and a distraction from my point. Further, if you think everyone isn't judged, then you are just loopy.
> More importantly, why would you expect more from a foreign applicant that from a local?
Because that is the stated legal purpose of the H1B program. It says that H1B workers have skills that the local programmers do not.
> The point is there shouldn't be discrimination, in either way.
In personal dealings, here we are talking about a government's responsibility to its citizens.
> H1-Bs are for specialty occupations that are in high demand to begin with.
If Disney decides to fire all its IT workers and replace them with contracted H1Bs then I would say the law failed. The purpose of the law is to fill knowledge gaps not add labor to the market.
> Not sure what encourages you to be more catholic than the Pope.
The law states the purpose.
Given that, wouldn't it make more sense for the extra money to go into education? How is contributing to unemployment going to get Americans more jobs?
What about companies that need the skills but can't afford the more expensive workers? If I'm a small startup with a $200k budget for an <insert niche field> expert but there are no citizens with the skills available (at all), paying $220k may not be an option, leaving me with either a loan or without the skills I need.
Unemployment is the result and those budgets are stretched these days. In some place unemployment pays for classes.
> What about companies that need the skills but can't afford the more expensive workers? If I'm a small startup with a $200k budget for an <insert niche field> expert but there are no citizens with the skills available (at all), paying $220k may not be an option, leaving me with either a loan or without the skills I need.
Why do you think its ok to not pay people the market rate just so you can benefit? Perhaps you need to compensate by equity or profit sharing? Why are workers less valuable then your startup?
> This mechanism is to reset to original intent of acquiring talent rather than cost-saving labor (as currently practiced).
completely agree - also looking at folks who come here to be educated getting work visas.
You would never get medicare treatment as only an H1-B worker, since if your unemployed, you cannot stay in the country long enough to be able to use medicare benefits much.
So you effectively pay at %12 tax on your income that you will never see the benefits of unless you immigrate.
Ah yeah;
But IIRC, there are some reciprocating treaties that let me get my money out?
This mentions that for australians it is reduced to 18 months: https://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/international/in...
