The H-1b part of the immigration reform bill is almost there (but not quite)! We have provisions that protect against discrimination of American workers, protect prevailing wages, require more audits, has enforcement mechanisms, and now a provision to fund college scholarships to address the shortages claimed by industry.
The most important thing missing from this legislation is a stronger definition of what "prevailing wages" are. First of all, the calculation considers entry level wages as "prevailing wages" which is why H-1b holders are paid so much less than American workers. The H-1b visa needs to define prevailing wage as nothing less than median wages in an occupation. If the bill is about the best and brightest (instead of cheapest) this is absolutely needed.
Please call your Senators and let them know that the H-1b bill is almost there. We simply need to protect American wages and prevent immigrants from being underpaid. If the H-1b is truly about the best and brightest - and not cheapest - industry should be willing to pay at least the median wage in an occupation.
The [Washington] Post seems determined to try to obscure a relatively simple point. Increasing the supply of skilled workers lowers their wages. This can be explained in exactly the same way as removing tariff barriers on shoes lowers the price of shoes. In both cases there will be benefits to the firms that do the importing/hiring and gains to the economy in the form of lower prices for the goods and services produced. But, it is ridiculous to pretend that the workers who must now compete with lower wage workers do not suffer. That is the way markets work and the Post should stop killing trees to try to convince people otherwise.
This "prevailing wage" stuff and "education credits" is nonsense. American companies can hire and train smart college and post college kids, mid-career folks, new citizens, etc.
It's about the money: big business wants indentured workers, not voters who can quit their job. To pretend that business is going to play by the rules is wishful thinking.
It is a labor subsidy, and there is no denying that. The only thing that the "prevailing wage", educational fees, and labor protections buy is is that it will increase the cost to replace an American worker. Because industry cares more about cost than anything else, it will help some. Plus, outplacement of workers will also be prohibited which will harm foreign firms the most. So it will make it more costly to offshore.
Politically I don't think we can defeat the H-1b. So the smart thing to do is limit the damage it does to American labor. If you make it more costly to replace an American worker they may decide not to. Or, they may decide to use it more sparingly.
It really blows that we must make these deals with industry. I don't believe that immigration laws should consider for a single second the needs of industry. Our immigration programs should be designed to make America a stronger nation. Period. If that helps industry, then it helps them. But that shouldn't be the primary goal.
Again, a chance for Webb to showcase his Democratic credentials and again, he shows that he's not aligned with the Democratic party as a whole. Yes, Webb is vehemently against outsourcing, but he took the question in a direction that puts him to the right of many Republicans. Webb went on to criticize the H1B visa process and went as far as to say that there should be no guest workers at all in the United States. Webb equated those coming to the US from Mexico to pick vegetables to those coming from India to work at AOL in Alexandria. Webb's view of outsourcing clearly puts him at odds with technology related businesses in Virginia.