Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.electronics.design > #445458 > unrolled thread

H-1B Reform

Started bybloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com
First post2017-01-31 08:16 -0800
Last post2017-02-06 03:24 -0800
Articles 20 on this page of 60 — 16 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design


Contents

  H-1B Reform bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 08:16 -0800
    Re: H-1B Reform George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-01-31 09:15 -0800
    Re: H-1B Reform Martin Riddle <martin_rid@verizon.net> - 2017-01-31 20:11 -0500
      Re: H-1B Reform Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-01-31 22:49 -0500
      Re: H-1B Reform dakupoto@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 22:52 -0800
        Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-05 07:23 -0800
          Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-05 18:02 -0500
            Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 07:27 -0800
              Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-06 20:26 -0500
                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-07 07:49 -0800
                  Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 12:18 -0500
                    Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-07 10:02 -0800
                      Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 20:21 -0500
                        Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 08:08 -0800
                          Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 12:28 -0500
                            Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 10:05 -0800
                              Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 13:13 -0500
                                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 12:16 -0800
                                  Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 20:13 -0500
                                    Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-09 07:19 -0800
                              Re: H-1B Reform Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 13:42 -0500
                                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 12:06 -0800
          Re: H-1B Reform rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 03:18 -0500
            Re: H-1B Reform bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-02-06 03:17 -0800
            Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 07:51 -0800
              Re: H-1B Reform makolber@yahoo.com - 2017-02-06 10:08 -0800
                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 10:11 -0800
                  Re: H-1B Reform Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-06 12:53 -0800
                    Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 13:22 -0800
                Re: H-1B Reform Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 20:36 +0000
                Re: H-1B Reform Neon John <no@never.com> - 2017-02-08 17:20 -0500
                  Re: H-1B Reform krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 20:14 -0500
              Re: H-1B Reform rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 19:36 -0500
                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-07 08:02 -0800
                  Re: H-1B Reform Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-07 17:01 -0500
                  Re: H-1B Reform rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 20:33 -0500
                    Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 08:18 -0800
                      Re: H-1B Reform rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:02 -0500
                        Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-08 14:36 -0800
                          Re: H-1B Reform rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 21:12 -0500
                            Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-09 07:42 -0800
                              Re: H-1B Reform Neon John <no@never.com> - 2017-02-09 11:02 -0500
                                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-09 10:36 -0800
                                Re: H-1B Reform Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-09 14:34 -0500
                                  Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-09 12:27 -0800
                                    Re: H-1B Reform Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-09 15:33 -0500
                                      Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-09 12:40 -0800
                                Re: H-1B Reform bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-02-09 17:58 -0800
          Re: H-1B Reform Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 17:10 +0000
            Re: H-1B Reform Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-06 09:24 -0800
              Re: H-1B Reform Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 18:05 +0000
                Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 10:18 -0800
                  Re: H-1B Reform Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 20:41 +0000
                    Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 13:31 -0800
                      Re: H-1B Reform Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 22:05 +0000
                        Re: H-1B Reform Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-02-06 14:56 -0800
        Re: H-1B Reform mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2017-02-05 10:32 -0500
          Re: H-1B Reform Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-05 19:15 +0100
            Re: H-1B Reform mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2017-02-05 23:06 -0500
              Re: H-1B Reform bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-02-06 03:24 -0800

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →


#445458 — H-1B Reform

Frombloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com
Date2017-01-31 08:16 -0800
SubjectH-1B Reform
Message-ID<8c2e13af-66be-4681-9e6e-f35419b90258@googlegroups.com>
This is going to fly like a lead balloon:

http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#445464

FromGeorge Herold <gherold@teachspin.com>
Date2017-01-31 09:15 -0800
Message-ID<258ef8bb-97c9-4b0b-a1cb-2d61600a2973@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#445458
On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 11:16:31 AM UTC-5, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:
> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f

Jeesh that's terrible journalism.  It's a bill in congress
(There are tons of silly bills.) and the picture is of Trump 
signing something.  Gives me the wrong impression. 

George H.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#445535

FromMartin Riddle <martin_rid@verizon.net>
Date2017-01-31 20:11 -0500
Message-ID<edd29chuiqini1476qulcfc7notq615d3r@4ax.com>
In reply to#445458
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

>
>This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f

So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?

Cheers

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#445554

FromSpehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat>
Date2017-01-31 22:49 -0500
Message-ID<olm29cprgj391v1elusig6d6kuqdu9marh@4ax.com>
In reply to#445535
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 20:11:58 -0500, the renowned Martin Riddle
<martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>>This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>
>So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>
>Cheers

There are always unintended consequences when governments meddle. 

--sp 

-- 
Best regards, 
Spehro Pefhany
Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition:            http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446256

Fromdakupoto@gmail.com
Date2017-02-04 22:52 -0800
Message-ID<67695248-fea5-41ee-9ff9-155211f69235@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#445535
On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> >
> >This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
> 
> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
> 
> Cheers

That is very well said. And now more and more
US high tech companies will try to outsource 
as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
sites.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446276

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-05 07:23 -0800
Message-ID<efoubhFqrcqU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446256
On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>
>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>

Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis? 
The day has only 24h.


>> Cheers
>
> That is very well said. And now more and more
> US high tech companies will try to outsource
> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
> sites.
>

They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a 
software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing 
of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower 
because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas. 
Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results 
will flow across the borders on "singing wires".

Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way 
to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration 
that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't 
find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies 
I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid 
beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446346

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-05 18:02 -0500
Message-ID<0fbf9chcqjmofpabcrb4i97qjvg0fecj65@4ax.com>
In reply to#446276
On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:45 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>>
>>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>>
>
>Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis? 
>The day has only 24h.
>
>
>>> Cheers
>>
>> That is very well said. And now more and more
>> US high tech companies will try to outsource
>> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
>> sites.
>>
>
>They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a 
>software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing 
>of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower 
>because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas. 
>Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results 
>will flow across the borders on "singing wires".

It may seem so but it's not true.  We have hundreds of H1B software
engineers, mostly here in the US but, sure, some in India.  Having
them here is more efficient than "out of sight - out of mind".
>
>Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way 
>to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration 
>that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't 
>find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies 
>I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid 
>beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.

It's not all about wages.  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446419

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-06 07:27 -0800
Message-ID<efriv2FcjniU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446346
On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:45 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>>>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>>>
>>>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>>>
>>
>> Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis?
>> The day has only 24h.
>>
>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> That is very well said. And now more and more
>>> US high tech companies will try to outsource
>>> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
>>> sites.
>>>
>>
>> They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a
>> software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing
>> of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower
>> because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas.
>> Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results
>> will flow across the borders on "singing wires".
>
> It may seem so but it's not true.  We have hundreds of H1B software
> engineers, mostly here in the US but, sure, some in India.  Having
> them here is more efficient than "out of sight - out of mind".


You would need good team leaders in India but yes, for many projects 
that doesn't work well or results in more problems than if they were local.

If managed right a remote relationship can work very well. 100% of my 
client relationships are now remote. Zoom and GoToMeeting make this very 
efficient.

>>
>> Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way
>> to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration
>> that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't
>> find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies
>> I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid
>> beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.
>
> It's not all about wages.


It is.


>                  ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>

It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid 
prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super 
easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now 
it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff 
that previous ones didn't.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446556

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-06 20:26 -0500
Message-ID<078i9chma6er7dlh3tf0dk02qq0k0qjukh@4ax.com>
In reply to#446419
On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:45 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>>>>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>>>>
>>>>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis?
>>> The day has only 24h.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> That is very well said. And now more and more
>>>> US high tech companies will try to outsource
>>>> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
>>>> sites.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a
>>> software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing
>>> of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower
>>> because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas.
>>> Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results
>>> will flow across the borders on "singing wires".
>>
>> It may seem so but it's not true.  We have hundreds of H1B software
>> engineers, mostly here in the US but, sure, some in India.  Having
>> them here is more efficient than "out of sight - out of mind".
>
>
>You would need good team leaders in India but yes, for many projects 
>that doesn't work well or results in more problems than if they were local.
>
>If managed right a remote relationship can work very well. 100% of my 
>client relationships are now remote. Zoom and GoToMeeting make this very 
>efficient.

You forgot to say "YMMV".  We do both but some jobs just can't be done
overseas.
>
>>>
>>> Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way
>>> to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration
>>> that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't
>>> find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies
>>> I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid
>>> beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.
>>
>> It's not all about wages.
>
>
>It is.

Of course it's not. Wages aren't the only cost of doing business.
>
>
>>                  ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>
>
>It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid 
>prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super 
>easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now 
>it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff 
>that previous ones didn't.

The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
jockeys.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446645

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-07 07:49 -0800
Message-ID<efu8itFt9ngU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446556
On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:45 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>>>>>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis?
>>>> The day has only 24h.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> That is very well said. And now more and more
>>>>> US high tech companies will try to outsource
>>>>> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
>>>>> sites.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a
>>>> software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing
>>>> of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower
>>>> because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas.
>>>> Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results
>>>> will flow across the borders on "singing wires".
>>>
>>> It may seem so but it's not true.  We have hundreds of H1B software
>>> engineers, mostly here in the US but, sure, some in India.  Having
>>> them here is more efficient than "out of sight - out of mind".
>>
>>
>> You would need good team leaders in India but yes, for many projects
>> that doesn't work well or results in more problems than if they were local.
>>
>> If managed right a remote relationship can work very well. 100% of my
>> client relationships are now remote. Zoom and GoToMeeting make this very
>> efficient.
>
> You forgot to say "YMMV".  We do both but some jobs just can't be done
> overseas.


Same here, there are always exceptions. This is why I had to find a 
local SW-engineer for one project. Pressure testing is hard to do via 
Internet. It also can't be shipped out because things can go seriously 
kablouie.

>>
>>>>
>>>> Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way
>>>> to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration
>>>> that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't
>>>> find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies
>>>> I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid
>>>> beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.
>>>
>>> It's not all about wages.
>>
>>
>> It is.
>
> Of course it's not. Wages aren't the only cost of doing business.


This has nothing to do with business, it has to do with work visa. Abuse 
of work visa rules can be completely stopped by enforcing the prevailing 
wage or some other wage limit. It is simple. The new administration 
seems to be the first one that understands this (and some other things).

>>
>>>                   ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>
>>
>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>> that previous ones didn't.
>
> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
> jockeys.
>

Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably 
find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or 
under-employed coders around.

H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US 
or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of 
cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446654

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-07 12:18 -0500
Message-ID<gtvj9chj20b87cvcvtj70huc20lta7vkob@4ax.com>
In reply to#446645
On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:45 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-02-04 22:52, dakupoto@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-5, Martin Riddle wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:27 -0800 (PST),
>>>>>>> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is going to fly like a lead balloon:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zg8k64f
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So instead of displacing 1 american worker, they'll displace 2?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh? How can a single engineer do the work of two on a consistent basis?
>>>>> The day has only 24h.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is very well said. And now more and more
>>>>>> US high tech companies will try to outsource
>>>>>> as many of their jobs as possible to off-shore
>>>>>> sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They'll do that anyhow and that's got nothing to do with H1B. Running a
>>>>> software outfit overseas is cheaper than paying for travel and housing
>>>>> of someone temporarily moved over here. The pay will also be much lower
>>>>> because the cost of daily life is much lower in many countries overseas.
>>>>> Also, there can't be import tariffs on it because their work results
>>>>> will flow across the borders on "singing wires".
>>>>
>>>> It may seem so but it's not true.  We have hundreds of H1B software
>>>> engineers, mostly here in the US but, sure, some in India.  Having
>>>> them here is more efficient than "out of sight - out of mind".
>>>
>>>
>>> You would need good team leaders in India but yes, for many projects
>>> that doesn't work well or results in more problems than if they were local.
>>>
>>> If managed right a remote relationship can work very well. 100% of my
>>> client relationships are now remote. Zoom and GoToMeeting make this very
>>> efficient.
>>
>> You forgot to say "YMMV".  We do both but some jobs just can't be done
>> overseas.
>
>
>Same here, there are always exceptions. This is why I had to find a 
>local SW-engineer for one project. Pressure testing is hard to do via 
>Internet. It also can't be shipped out because things can go seriously 
>kablouie.
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Raising and most of all enforcing the required wage is the perfect way
>>>>> to fix H1B and I've always said that. Finally we have an administration
>>>>> that understand it. H1B is meant to haul in talent where we truly can't
>>>>> find an engineer for, not to obtain work results cheaper. The companies
>>>>> I worked for used H1B for exactly that intended purpose and they paid
>>>>> beaucoup bucks for those folks in salary.
>>>>
>>>> It's not all about wages.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is.
>>
>> Of course it's not. Wages aren't the only cost of doing business.
>
>
>This has nothing to do with business, it has to do with work visa. Abuse 
>of work visa rules can be completely stopped by enforcing the prevailing 
>wage or some other wage limit. It is simple. The new administration 
>seems to be the first one that understands this (and some other things).

Use <> abuse

There is no way we could hire the number of "short-term" people we
need without the H1Bs.  Regular employees are used as the architects
and team leads (and to keep the corporate memory).  Programming and
jobs like verification are done mostly by H1Bs, under the direction of
employees.  It's a volitile market and the idea is to use contractors
as short-term relief, keeping the employees over slumps, hopefully.

Again, it's a "non-US multi-national".  They could move all the jobs
out if the government made it even more difficult (which governments
are really good at doing).  Democrats would love more unemployed.

>>>>                   ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>
>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>> jockeys.
>>
>
>Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably 
>find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or 
>under-employed coders around.

No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.  

>H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US 
>or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of 
>cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.

"Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
unfillable with resident labor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446660

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-07 10:02 -0800
Message-ID<efugd1FempU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446654
On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:

[...]


>>>>>                    ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>
>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>> jockeys.
>>>
>>
>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>> under-employed coders around.
>
> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>

Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform 
these design tasks here and do something about it.


>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>
> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
> unfillable with resident labor.
>

Why are they unfillable?

For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT 
programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article, 
they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-americas-tech-talent-shortage/275319/

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446715

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-07 20:21 -0500
Message-ID<mesk9c5jnooc9edap9084pbnmusi0tfh6m@4ax.com>
In reply to#446660
On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>
>>>>>>                    ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>
>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>> jockeys.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>> under-employed coders around.
>>
>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>
>
>Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform 
>these design tasks here and do something about it.

We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
"off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.

>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>
>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>
>
>Why are they unfillable?

Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
with no chance of direct hire.
>
>For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT 
>programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article, 
>they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:

But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>
>https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-americas-tech-talent-shortage/275319/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446783

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-08 08:08 -0800
Message-ID<eg0u3sFfedbU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446715
On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>>>>>>>                     ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>
>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>
> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?


Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always 
been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a 
lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against 
another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore, 
do is level the playing field.


> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>

They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.


>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>
>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>
>>
>> Why are they unfillable?
>
> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
> with no chance of direct hire.


I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to 
make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.

For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun. 
It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just 
as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way 
but many programmers do.

>>
>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>
> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.

There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and 
prefer freelancing just because of that.

>>
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-americas-tech-talent-shortage/275319/


-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446804

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-08 12:28 -0500
Message-ID<frkm9c1d297p5r0stvsk6frus1qfvo5cgh@4ax.com>
In reply to#446783
On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>                     ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>
>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>
>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>
>
>Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always 
>been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a 
>lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against 
>another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore, 
>do is level the playing field.

OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.
You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
eat it too.  Got it.

>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>
>
>They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.

They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).

>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>
>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>
>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>> with no chance of direct hire.
>
>
>I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to 
>make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.

But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
short-term contract work.  BTDT.

>For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun. 
>It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just 
>as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way 
>but many programmers do.

They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
because they come to you.  Different kettle.
>
>>>
>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>
>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>
>There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and 
>prefer freelancing just because of that.

It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
an employer.  Two, in fact.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446817

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-08 10:05 -0800
Message-ID<eg14ugFgsgsU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446804
On 2017-02-08 09:28, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                      ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>>
>>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>>
>>
>> Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always
>> been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a
>> lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against
>> another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore,
>> do is level the playing field.
>
> OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
> import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
> they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.


Huh? Where did I ever say that?


> You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
> eat it too.  Got it.
>
>>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>>
>>
>> They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.
>
> They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
> customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
> That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).
>

Sure. That should always be made possible. It's got nothing to do with 
H1B, that is simply having a foreign design center.


>>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>>
>>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>>> with no chance of direct hire.
>>
>>
>> I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to
>> make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.
>
> But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
> short-term contract work.  BTDT.
>

It is not. I do this for a living. So why am I not stuck in a cheap 
apartment?


>> For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun.
>> It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just
>> as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way
>> but many programmers do.
>
> They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
> because they come to you.  Different kettle.


It can be the same for programmers. They just have to become good enough 
so people either come to them or are willing to do it remotely. We live 
in a high-cost country and the only way to keep a decent job, temporary 
or not, is by becoming good enough at what one is doing.

Example: The programmer for one of the projects I am involved in lives 
and works in his own home about 7000 miles from here. It works. Another 
works from his home about 3-4 miles from here and has mostly West Coast 
clients. Whenever we have to work together I usually go there by 
mountain bike. Even if we could get a certain task done remotely I 
sometimes rode (and did not bill my client for that travel time) because 
it's fun and healthy.

>>>>
>>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>>
>>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>>
>> There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and
>> prefer freelancing just because of that.
>
> It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
> an employer.  Two, in fact.
>

If people feel like not marketing their skills themselves then they have 
to live with the middleman company. I never did and never will.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446819

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-08 13:13 -0500
Message-ID<qinm9cp2gp9cclbgl10rqltk0e1sqs2e5q@4ax.com>
In reply to#446817
On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:05:28 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-08 09:28, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                      ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>>>
>>>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>>>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always
>>> been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a
>>> lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against
>>> another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore,
>>> do is level the playing field.
>>
>> OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
>> import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
>> they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.
>
>
>Huh? Where did I ever say that?

You've been arguing for the elimination of the H1B.  What other
conclusion could one come to?
>
>
>> You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
>> eat it too.  Got it.
>>
>>>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.
>>
>> They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
>> customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
>> That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).
>>
>
>Sure. That should always be made possible. It's got nothing to do with 
>H1B, that is simply having a foreign design center.

Of course it does.  H1Bs are a "necessary evil" for the business to
exist here.  

>>>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>>>
>>>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>>>> with no chance of direct hire.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to
>>> make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.
>>
>> But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
>> short-term contract work.  BTDT.
>>
>
>It is not. I do this for a living. So why am I not stuck in a cheap 
>apartment?

You work from home.  That's not going to be done with low-level
programming or verification jobs.  <sheesh>
>
>>> For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun.
>>> It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just
>>> as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way
>>> but many programmers do.
>>
>> They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
>> because they come to you.  Different kettle.
>
>
>It can be the same for programmers. They just have to become good enough 
>so people either come to them or are willing to do it remotely. We live 
>in a high-cost country and the only way to keep a decent job, temporary 
>or not, is by becoming good enough at what one is doing.

No, it can't.  These are low-level coding and test jobs.  You know,
that sort of cruft you won't do?

>
>Example: The programmer for one of the projects I am involved in lives 
>and works in his own home about 7000 miles from here. It works. Another 
>works from his home about 3-4 miles from here and has mostly West Coast 
>clients. Whenever we have to work together I usually go there by 
>mountain bike. Even if we could get a certain task done remotely I 
>sometimes rode (and did not bill my client for that travel time) because 
>it's fun and healthy.

We have a DSP engineer who lives in Montana, too.  Completely
different issue.  You can't do that with a team of hundres of
short-time transients.
>
>>>>>
>>>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>>>
>>>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>>>
>>> There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and
>>> prefer freelancing just because of that.
>>
>> It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
>> an employer.  Two, in fact.
>>
>
>If people feel like not marketing their skills themselves then they have 
>to live with the middleman company. I never did and never will.

Good grief.  The job has to be done.  We can't just waive a stick and
make a low-level coding job a high-level architect's job (though the
US education system is trying).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446847

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-08 12:16 -0800
Message-ID<eg1ck8FigeeU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446819
On 2017-02-08 10:13, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:05:28 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-08 09:28, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                       ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>>>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>>>>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always
>>>> been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a
>>>> lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against
>>>> another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore,
>>>> do is level the playing field.
>>>
>>> OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
>>> import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
>>> they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.
>>
>>
>> Huh? Where did I ever say that?
>
> You've been arguing for the elimination of the H1B.


Where did I ever say that? Please quote.


>   ... What other conclusion could one come to?


That maybe you were wrong and I never said that. Because I didn't.

>>
>>> You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
>>> eat it too.  Got it.
>>>
>>>>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.
>>>
>>> They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
>>> customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
>>> That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).
>>>
>>
>> Sure. That should always be made possible. It's got nothing to do with
>> H1B, that is simply having a foreign design center.
>
> Of course it does.  H1Bs are a "necessary evil" for the business to
> exist here.
>

If the only way to get their designs done he is the inclusion of H1B 
specialists they should not have a problem paying the required wages, 
should they?


>>>>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>>>>> with no chance of direct hire.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to
>>>> make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.
>>>
>>> But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
>>> short-term contract work.  BTDT.
>>>
>>
>> It is not. I do this for a living. So why am I not stuck in a cheap
>> apartment?
>
> You work from home.  That's not going to be done with low-level
> programming or verification jobs.  <sheesh>


Well, we got that done successfully, several times. Over one ocean plus 
some land.


>>
>>>> For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun.
>>>> It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just
>>>> as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way
>>>> but many programmers do.
>>>
>>> They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
>>> because they come to you.  Different kettle.
>>
>>
>> It can be the same for programmers. They just have to become good enough
>> so people either come to them or are willing to do it remotely. We live
>> in a high-cost country and the only way to keep a decent job, temporary
>> or not, is by becoming good enough at what one is doing.
>
> No, it can't.  These are low-level coding and test jobs.  You know,
> that sort of cruft you won't do?
>

Sometimes it is necessary to come out there and do it locally. Nothing 
wrong with that, I've done that as well. Get a room at a hotel or some 
extended-stay accommodation. You can still have a home to come home to. 
You do not have to live your lief out of a suitcase.

>>
>> Example: The programmer for one of the projects I am involved in lives
>> and works in his own home about 7000 miles from here. It works. Another
>> works from his home about 3-4 miles from here and has mostly West Coast
>> clients. Whenever we have to work together I usually go there by
>> mountain bike. Even if we could get a certain task done remotely I
>> sometimes rode (and did not bill my client for that travel time) because
>> it's fun and healthy.
>
> We have a DSP engineer who lives in Montana, too.  Completely
> different issue.  You can't do that with a team of hundres of
> short-time transients.


I don't know your product but we have done exactly that with complicated 
medical equipment design. In one rather extreme case there were half a 
dozen local engineers and a dozen external ones. It ended up completely 
blowing a competitor out of the water.

>>>>>>
>>>>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>>>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>>>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>>>>
>>>>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>>>>
>>>> There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and
>>>> prefer freelancing just because of that.
>>>
>>> It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
>>> an employer.  Two, in fact.
>>>
>>
>> If people feel like not marketing their skills themselves then they have
>> to live with the middleman company. I never did and never will.
>
> Good grief.  The job has to be done.  We can't just waive a stick and
> make a low-level coding job a high-level architect's job (though the
> US education system is trying).
>

Then just "rent" the coders. There are plenty of US-based ones and if 
needed they come out there. If it has to be H1B pay them accordingly and 
all is good. What I am squarely against is abusing H1B to obtain cheap 
indentured labor.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446934

Fromkrw@notreal.com
Date2017-02-08 20:13 -0500
Message-ID<k4gn9cp4rmaj5v90it1hbumakjmmd5quov@4ax.com>
In reply to#446847
On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:16:32 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-02-08 10:13, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:05:28 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-08 09:28, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                       ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>>>>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>>>>>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always
>>>>> been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a
>>>>> lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against
>>>>> another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore,
>>>>> do is level the playing field.
>>>>
>>>> OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
>>>> import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
>>>> they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.
>>>
>>>
>>> Huh? Where did I ever say that?
>>
>> You've been arguing for the elimination of the H1B.
>
>
>Where did I ever say that? Please quote.

You want double the "minimum wage".  That's the same damned thing.

>
>
>>   ... What other conclusion could one come to?
>
>
>That maybe you were wrong and I never said that. Because I didn't.

You did.
>
>>>
>>>> You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
>>>> eat it too.  Got it.
>>>>
>>>>>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.
>>>>
>>>> They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
>>>> customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
>>>> That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure. That should always be made possible. It's got nothing to do with
>>> H1B, that is simply having a foreign design center.
>>
>> Of course it does.  H1Bs are a "necessary evil" for the business to
>> exist here.
>>
>
>If the only way to get their designs done he is the inclusion of H1B 
>specialists they should not have a problem paying the required wages, 
>should they?

[F . . | . . | . ./]
 Logic Content
>
>
>>>>>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>>>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>>>>>> with no chance of direct hire.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to
>>>>> make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.
>>>>
>>>> But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
>>>> short-term contract work.  BTDT.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is not. I do this for a living. So why am I not stuck in a cheap
>>> apartment?
>>
>> You work from home.  That's not going to be done with low-level
>> programming or verification jobs.  <sheesh>
>
>
>Well, we got that done successfully, several times. Over one ocean plus 
>some land.

Apples and orangutangs.

>>>>> For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun.
>>>>> It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just
>>>>> as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way
>>>>> but many programmers do.
>>>>
>>>> They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
>>>> because they come to you.  Different kettle.
>>>
>>>
>>> It can be the same for programmers. They just have to become good enough
>>> so people either come to them or are willing to do it remotely. We live
>>> in a high-cost country and the only way to keep a decent job, temporary
>>> or not, is by becoming good enough at what one is doing.
>>
>> No, it can't.  These are low-level coding and test jobs.  You know,
>> that sort of cruft you won't do?
>>
>
>Sometimes it is necessary to come out there and do it locally. Nothing 
>wrong with that, I've done that as well. Get a room at a hotel or some 
>extended-stay accommodation. You can still have a home to come home to. 
>You do not have to live your lief out of a suitcase.

For six months?  That means low-rent housing, something you were
railing against, IIRC.
>
>>>
>>> Example: The programmer for one of the projects I am involved in lives
>>> and works in his own home about 7000 miles from here. It works. Another
>>> works from his home about 3-4 miles from here and has mostly West Coast
>>> clients. Whenever we have to work together I usually go there by
>>> mountain bike. Even if we could get a certain task done remotely I
>>> sometimes rode (and did not bill my client for that travel time) because
>>> it's fun and healthy.
>>
>> We have a DSP engineer who lives in Montana, too.  Completely
>> different issue.  You can't do that with a team of hundres of
>> short-time transients.
>
>
>I don't know your product but we have done exactly that with complicated 
>medical equipment design. In one rather extreme case there were half a 
>dozen local engineers and a dozen external ones. It ended up completely 
>blowing a competitor out of the water.

I'm calling bullshit on that one.
>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>>>>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>>>>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and
>>>>> prefer freelancing just because of that.
>>>>
>>>> It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
>>>> an employer.  Two, in fact.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If people feel like not marketing their skills themselves then they have
>>> to live with the middleman company. I never did and never will.
>>
>> Good grief.  The job has to be done.  We can't just waive a stick and
>> make a low-level coding job a high-level architect's job (though the
>> US education system is trying).
>>
>
>Then just "rent" the coders. There are plenty of US-based ones and if 
>needed they come out there. If it has to be H1B pay them accordingly and 
>all is good. What I am squarely against is abusing H1B to obtain cheap 
>indentured labor.

We *are* renting the coders.  They happen to be H1Bs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#447017

FromJoerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Date2017-02-09 07:19 -0800
Message-ID<eg3fj9Fr6uU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#446934
On 2017-02-08 17:13, krw@notreal.com wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:16:32 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-08 10:13, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:05:28 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-02-08 09:28, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:08:51 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-02-07 17:21, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:02:30 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-07 09:18, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:49:06 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-06 17:26, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2017-02-05 15:02, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        ...  It really is impossible to find hundreds of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contractors, quickly, in the US.  H1B contractors fill the crests in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> workload so the employee base is more stable (we have a number of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contract EEs, too, but they're not H1Bs).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's perfectly ok to use H1B contractors. However, they need to be paid
>>>>>>>>>>>> prevailing wage or higher and that must be _verified_ which is super
>>>>>>>>>>>> easy to do. I have suggested that all the time but it wasn't done. Now
>>>>>>>>>>>> it will be because the new administration seems to understand some stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>> that previous ones didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The H1Bs at my CPoE aren't paid the same as employees, sure, but they
>>>>>>>>>>> don't have the same responsibilities, either.  They're basically code
>>>>>>>>>>> jockeys.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Once they have to start paying them $130k/year each they will probably
>>>>>>>>>> find Americans for that job, and fast. There are plenty of un- or
>>>>>>>>>> under-employed coders around.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, they'd just move *all* jobs overseas.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sure, that can happen. Then we need to find out why we cannot perform
>>>>>>>> these design tasks here and do something about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We can (do), if the government would let it alone.  My job has been
>>>>>>> "off-shored" from somewhere else.  Do you want to stop that, too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course not. Moving design tasks to where the talent is has always
>>>>>> been a smart idea. Same if you can obtain sufficiently good results at a
>>>>>> lower cost. In a world economy every region has to compete against
>>>>>> another. Competiton is a good thing. What each region should, therefore,
>>>>>> do is level the playing field.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, so you want to leave the *foreign* US jobs here but don't want to
>>>>> import *any* foreign workers to fill short-term positions, even if
>>>>> they're paid similarly to (unavailable) locals, for the same skills.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Huh? Where did I ever say that?
>>>
>>> You've been arguing for the elimination of the H1B.
>>
>>
>> Where did I ever say that? Please quote.
>
> You want double the "minimum wage".  That's the same damned thing.
>

It is not. As I said many times H1B is meant to get skilled labor on the 
world market. Skill that cannot be found here. If a company is unwilling 
to pay commensurate wage then they do not have a real shortage. It's 
that simple.

>>
>>
>>>    ... What other conclusion could one come to?
>>
>>
>> That maybe you were wrong and I never said that. Because I didn't.
>
> You did.


Baloney. I didn't and as expected you won't quote me because you can't. 
Don't start engaging in fake news :-)

>>
>>>>
>>>>> You want to export *all* of those salaries.  You want your cake and
>>>>> eat it too.  Got it.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Getting rid of H1Bs is a good way to do it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They would still use your design team if they can't get the results locally.
>>>>>
>>>>> They were doing it at home but it makes sense to do it closer to the
>>>>> customer.  If the job is made more difficult to do here, it won't be.
>>>>> That's the bottom line (for all business decisions).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure. That should always be made possible. It's got nothing to do with
>>>> H1B, that is simply having a foreign design center.
>>>
>>> Of course it does.  H1Bs are a "necessary evil" for the business to
>>> exist here.
>>>
>>
>> If the only way to get their designs done he is the inclusion of H1B
>> specialists they should not have a problem paying the required wages,
>> should they?
>
> [F . . | . . | . ./]
>   Logic Content


Huh? At least the administration (finally!) understands this. It is sad 
that it took a landslide election to get there. Heck, the basic idea 
even came from the left and is essentially bipartisan.

>>
>>>>>>>>>> H1B was meant to obtain special talent that could not be found in the US
>>>>>>>>>> or where we simply don't have enough engineers, not for hiring scores of
>>>>>>>>>> cheap programmers. Now it will (hopefully) revert to that original intent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Special" has lots of meanings.  The restriction is that the job is
>>>>>>>>> unfillable with resident labor.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why are they unfillable?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because not enough people want a three or six month programming job
>>>>>>> with no chance of direct hire.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have met lots of people who do. Also, that still beats being unable to
>>>>>> make a good living or being stuck in some cheap apartment.
>>>>>
>>>>> But they *will* be stuck in a cheap apartment.  That's the nature of
>>>>> short-term contract work.  BTDT.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is not. I do this for a living. So why am I not stuck in a cheap
>>>> apartment?
>>>
>>> You work from home.  That's not going to be done with low-level
>>> programming or verification jobs.  <sheesh>
>>
>>
>> Well, we got that done successfully, several times. Over one ocean plus
>> some land.
>
> Apples and orangutangs.
>

No, it was mostly organization skills. These were embedded products 
inside an intricate system where most people think it can't be done 
remotely yet it was successfully done.


>>>>>> For me, having shorter term stints (until a project is complete) is fun.
>>>>>> It provides a smorgasbord of tasks for me which are all different. Just
>>>>>> as I want it. There are not many hardware engineers who feel that way
>>>>>> but many programmers do.
>>>>>
>>>>> They simply don't want to move for short-term work.  You don't have to
>>>>> because they come to you.  Different kettle.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It can be the same for programmers. They just have to become good enough
>>>> so people either come to them or are willing to do it remotely. We live
>>>> in a high-cost country and the only way to keep a decent job, temporary
>>>> or not, is by becoming good enough at what one is doing.
>>>
>>> No, it can't.  These are low-level coding and test jobs.  You know,
>>> that sort of cruft you won't do?
>>>
>>
>> Sometimes it is necessary to come out there and do it locally. Nothing
>> wrong with that, I've done that as well. Get a room at a hotel or some
>> extended-stay accommodation. You can still have a home to come home to.
>> You do not have to live your lief out of a suitcase.
>
> For six months?  That means low-rent housing, something you were
> railing against, IIRC.


I was not. Obtaining temporary housing either in a hotel, an 
extended-stay place or a rented apartment is not a problem for a 
technical professional. Just like camping in the wilderness isn't for 
someone with a requirement to work even more remotely. I have done it 
dozens of time. Key is you _have_ to have a _real_ _home_ to come back 
to. And I always did.

Of course, the temporary accommodations have to be adequate so you can 
let your family follow at times and explore a new area together. My dad 
did that as well and thinking back to my times as a kid this was fun.

>>
>>>>
>>>> Example: The programmer for one of the projects I am involved in lives
>>>> and works in his own home about 7000 miles from here. It works. Another
>>>> works from his home about 3-4 miles from here and has mostly West Coast
>>>> clients. Whenever we have to work together I usually go there by
>>>> mountain bike. Even if we could get a certain task done remotely I
>>>> sometimes rode (and did not bill my client for that travel time) because
>>>> it's fun and healthy.
>>>
>>> We have a DSP engineer who lives in Montana, too.  Completely
>>> different issue.  You can't do that with a team of hundres of
>>> short-time transients.
>>
>>
>> I don't know your product but we have done exactly that with complicated
>> medical equipment design. In one rather extreme case there were half a
>> dozen local engineers and a dozen external ones. It ended up completely
>> blowing a competitor out of the water.
>
> I'm calling bullshit on that one.


So if you can't do something or you can't imagine something it is BS to 
you? Now you are sounding a bit like the drive-by media Limbaugh was 
always talking about. The folks who stood there with dropped jaws last 
Nov-8.

>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For certain high-skill or niche jobs it is certainly true. WRT
>>>>>>>> programmers what I hear is more like the first part of this article,
>>>>>>>> they are heaving trouble finding enough gigs or employment:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But they don't want to move for short term employment, either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are more people than you think who abhor office politics and
>>>>>> prefer freelancing just because of that.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's *NOT* freelancing.  It's contract work.  You're still working for
>>>>> an employer.  Two, in fact.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If people feel like not marketing their skills themselves then they have
>>>> to live with the middleman company. I never did and never will.
>>>
>>> Good grief.  The job has to be done.  We can't just waive a stick and
>>> make a low-level coding job a high-level architect's job (though the
>>> US education system is trying).
>>>
>>
>> Then just "rent" the coders. There are plenty of US-based ones and if
>> needed they come out there. If it has to be H1B pay them accordingly and
>> all is good. What I am squarely against is abusing H1B to obtain cheap
>> indentured labor.
>
> We *are* renting the coders.  They happen to be H1Bs.
>

Then rent local ones. There are plenty. Pretty soon you will have to or 
it'll get expensive. H1B was never meant to temp-hire people without 
niche skills, shouldn't be used for that and in the near future very 
likely won't be used for that anymore.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design


csiph-web