H-1B Spotlight Shines on a Distraction

Don Tennant

Reliant Energy in Houston is taking a lot of heat for bringing work under an outsourced IT contract back in-house, and hiring H-1B visa holders to help do the job. What's unfortunate about the outcry is that it's yet another needless distraction from the real issue of H-1B abuse.


Computerworld's Patrick Thibodeau reported last week that Reliant had ended an outsourcing contract with Accenture, and submitted nine notices of intent with the Department of Labor to fill some of the positions on its new in-house team with H-1B workers:

Reliant hired H-1B visa holders mostly to fill software engineering jobs at its Houston facilities, according to DOL documents. Salaries for those jobs ranged from $72,000 to $95,000. The company also hired an H-1B visa holder as a database administrator at a salary of $80,000. A Reliant spokeswoman, Pat Hammond, said the H-1B employees hired by Reliant had previously been employed by the outsourcer under the canceled contract.

The brouhaha stems from the fact that Reliant in October received $20 million in federal stimulus funds for electric grid modernization projects. The contention is that since Reliant received federal stimulus money, it had no business hiring H-1B workers. That's nonsense, given the facts of the case, as reported by Computerworld:

Hammond said that Reliant hired a recruiting firm to help refill the internal positions. She added that many people were interviewed, but that the company had difficulty filling some jobs that required specialized knowledge.

'Some of the most qualified applicants were working for the outsourcing firm,' said Hammond, and thus were familiar with the company's systems. Some of these H-1B workers were hired to fill those slots. Hammond stressed that the company 'did interview a range of candidates for those positions.'

And, she added, the other 37 IT positions brought in-house were filled by local workers.

Hammond also noted that none of the new IT positions supported the project funded with federal stimulus funds.

So here we have a case in which a company made the business decision to include nine H-1B visa holders -- who were already working on the projects that were brought back in-house-among the 46 workers it hired for the team. The H-1B workers were paid the prevailing wage, and had demonstrated expertise in the specific projects in question. Why is that a problem? According to Computerworld:

Nonetheless, Kim Berry, president of the Summit, N.J.-based Programmers Guild, said that a goal of the stimulus program is to preserve and create jobs for U.S. workers. He said that companies accepting stimulus money are signing "a contract with the American taxpayer."

Berry argues that Reliant didn't say it couldn't find qualified Americans to fill the internal positions. 'What they are saying is the people already knew the job and that made them valuable,' he said. Hammond disputed Berry's claim and said the company is doing 'a thorough search for every one of the positions that we have.'

It's strange that Reliant was put in the position of having to defend itself for hiring nine H-1B workers who were already familiar with the job, and who therefore added value to the projects. That sounds like a prudent business decision to me. If my tax dollars are going into stimulus packages, I want the money spent by companies that know how to make smart decisions. If Reliant had taken the Accenture contract back in-house and then farmed the work out to some H-1B body shop that was paying workers below the prevailing wage, that would be an issue that would clearly warrant outrage and the focus of our attention.


No doubt, abuses of that very nature are rampant, and yet here we are getting up in arms over a case in which everybody did everything right. I wonder how many unprincipled H-1B body shop operators read the Computerworld story and laughed at the fact that once again, the spotlight was taken off of them and shined on a distraction.

Add Comment      Leave a comment on this blog post
Feb 1, 2010 1:13 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Tom

If you disagree with the position I took in this post, it would add much more to the discussion if you provided a substantiated counter-argument.

Feb 1, 2010 1:21 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to Tom

Hey Don,

Even though your detractors don't come across as the sharpest tools in the shed, they're at least internet savvy and may have held a high paying IT job at some point. In effect, I consider them generally smarter than some of the USCIS dolts who issue H1B and L1 visas everyday. I was just seeing a video forward of how a psychopath called Manoj Kargudri entered the US willy-nilly on a fake employment contract and it took 3 years before they finally caught him.

Now, these blunt detractors still cannot understand the difference between meaningful and manipulative immigration as evidenced by Tom's comment above. What shot does the USCIS have of ever getting it right?

The US is headed down the road of losing foreign born talent systematically over the next generation. Populist Obama has his unionized sidekicks up in a frenzy with his protectionist pander. China and Australia are going to have fun during this time. Docile Canada may also manage to score some steals. The US however appears headed to become one large Lake Wobegon where the citizens fiercely believe that all their women are strong, their men handsome and all their kids (of course) above average.

Feb 1, 2010 1:37 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to Indian_H1B

Now compare the crook Kargudri's case with how a totally different demographic are treated. Like me, most of my Indian friends in the US have graduate degrees from top schools here and have been working for blue-chip firms following school. Those of them getting PhDs have been systematically abused for the last couple of years when they go abroad to get their H-1Bs stamped on their passports. A process that typically takes a day or 2 has been taking 3-4 months. The reason? A guy getting his PhD in semi-conductor physics/electrical engineering from Berkeley and working for Intel may be using his academic prowess to manufacture some unthought of new bombs.

Now if you are Intel, how patient would you have to  be as you wait for your H-1B to return to work? Does it make sense to even have projects on hold until your researcher returns?

Does it surprise you then, that Intel, Texas Intruments are others are building research labs in Banagalore and hiring PhDs (usually those getting them in the US) there?

Feb 1, 2010 1:50 AM Dave Chapman Dave Chapman  says:

The problem with the H1-B program right now is that the whole thing has accumulated so much hatred that the best course of action is to eliminate it and try again.  The fact that we were treated to the spectacle of corporate lobbyists talking about an "Engineering Shortage" even as hundreds of thousands of experienced, qualified, degreed US citizens were forced to take jobs in some other field did not help.

I am afraid that the political reality right now is that, if the pro-immigration forces do not reform H1-B and the other "Guest Worker" programs, then there will be a national movement to abolish ALL immigration for a few decades.  It happened once before, in 1924. 


One interesting feature of this law was that the quota established for immigrants from India was zero.

The proponents of H1-B have told too many lies over the last ten years to be taken seriously.  It is my opinion that the program is hopelessly corrupt and should be abolished.

-Dave Chapman

Candidate for US Congress

14th district, Palo Alto, California

Feb 1, 2010 2:10 AM Jason Jason  says: in response to Dave Chapman


I work in the healthcare field and H-1B visas have helped us meet the shortage of neccessary healthcare workers. What is happening in to IT professionals on H-1B visas is really hurting US healthcare because it is going to keep a shortage alive that could be rectified with H-1B workers.

Feb 1, 2010 4:01 AM P Henry P Henry  says: in response to Jason

You have a shortage with +10% unemployment?  What jobs are going unfilled?

Feb 1, 2010 4:07 AM P Henry P Henry  says: in response to Indian_H1B

   It seems you haven't been paying attention.  Australia doesn't seem to be welcoming the cheap, foreign labor with open arms either http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1903038,00.html

   Also, the Chinese have been having trouble in India because there are concerns about labor issues. 


   No one is buying the lies anymore.  First, it was that there's a shortage.  Then, Americans weren't smart enough.  Finally, Americans must just be racist (proven wrong by the links above).  This program's days are numbered.

Feb 1, 2010 10:45 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says:


I must respectfully disagree with your position here.  My counter-argument mirrors that of Berry's: This crux of this issue is that Reliant Energy took the bailout money.  The purpose of this government subsidy is simple: create jobs. 

The easy thing to do is to hire the guest workers directly - and I agree in this case that made the most business sense.  However the right thing to do is to hire American workers.  There comes a time when American companies need to act in the interest of America, not just their shareholders.  This is one of those cases.  American tax-payers came to the rescue of American companies so how about some gratitude?  Or do they believe they are entitled to the money and have no obligations in return?

American business wasn't always blind to national interest.  There use to be solid corporate citizens.  I'm not sure when that changed, but it is clear that most American business no longer cares about the future of the American people - especially the larger companies.  We are just another market to them, not a nation with values, heritage, and representative of something much more profound than money.

Feb 1, 2010 11:29 AM JRinColorado JRinColorado  says: in response to Jason

Hmmmm. Interesting you claim the H1's are "saving the healthcare field.

Interviewed four last week who claimed to have over 10 years of Medical EDI systems analysis. When I asked each of them (individually) what is ICD-9, not a SINGLE one knew. Thinking there was a language barrier issue, I asked AND wrote it on the Whiteboard. Still no answer; BUT one did try to B.S his way through the answer. I asked him to slow down and take his time. When he was getting fluttered, the tone became defensive, fast (hard to understand) and then the perverbal "deer in the headlight" look.

So much for the "best and brightest". More like CHEAP and DOCILE.

Feb 1, 2010 11:30 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to R. Lawson

Always nice to hear from you, Roy, and I agree with much of what you say here. I do think we need to be careful about making the "American taxpayer" argument, because it perpetuates the myth that guest workers don't pay U.S. taxes. The money spent for those government subsidies came from us taxpayers, including guest workers, so in my view that in and of itself isn't a valid reason not to hire guest workers.

Feb 1, 2010 11:32 AM JRinColorado JRinColorado  says: in response to Dave Chapman


If I lived in Cali's 14th district, you'd get my vote.

Feb 1, 2010 12:22 PM Tom Tom  says:

yes Don, you're pro-H-1b

we get it!

Feb 2, 2010 1:33 AM Kim Berry - Programmers Guild Kim Berry - Programmers Guild  says:

Hi Don,

You wrote:

"It's strange that Reliant was put in the position of having to defend itself for hiring nine H-1B workers who were already familiar with the job, and who therefore added value to the projects. That sounds like a prudent business decision to me."

Ok, we understand, you favor allowing employers to sponsor H-1b workers regardless of whether qualified Americans are available to do the job.

1. If HP, for example, hired 100 H-1b that had two years of experience rather than hiring new U.s. grads from U.S. universities, would you make a similar statement?

"It's strange that HP was put in the position of having to defend itself for hiring 100 H-1B workers who were already experienced in the skills that HP sought, and who therefore added value to the projects. That sounds like a prudent business decision to me."

2. How far down the H-1b rathole do you go, Don? What if HP hired the workers because they were cheaper?

"It's strange that HP was put in the position of having to defend itself for hiring 100 H-1B workers who were asking a lower bill rate than the U.S. applicants, and who therefore added value to HP share holders. That sounds like a prudent business decision to me."

3. What if HP were hiring H-1b rather than Americans primarily because they would be "indentured servants" who would be less likely to leave for better opportunites - as I personally witnessed NEC Electronics in Roseville, California do circa 1995 - would you write:

"It's strange that HP was put in the position of having to defend itself for hiring 100 H-1B workers who were less likely to disrupt a critical project by leaving in the middle for a better opportunity. That sounds like a prudent business decision to me."



Feb 2, 2010 1:40 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to R. Lawson

I guess this would take us to the nebulous realm of how globalization and immigration are not concepts that play well together. If the US considers itself a true free-market economy, it should ensure that minimal barriers exist to the flow of capital to where it's most required. Strictly speaking, this should apply to human capital as well. If that model is taken too far, I can see how this would become the United States of India and China.

My purpose was to not deviate from Don's main point. I think he's right in that the H-1B is a badly flawed system (as we all agree). However, sensationalizing the more minor issues and rabble-rousing is both ignoring these fundamental flaws and leading to the view that the H-1B is ultimately a loss for America - a notion that seems too extreme.

I think the correct course of action is to not scrap the H-1B but to enforce guardrails to ensure that America imports the best and the brightest. The timeline is particularly critical. The H-1B is the only work visa that is dual intent. The true assessment of each H-1B ought to be their net present value to America over a lifetime.

Feb 2, 2010 1:58 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Indian_H1B

I think we have some common ground, which is great.  Let's just a bit wonkish for a moment:

"However, sensationalizing the more minor issues and rabble-rousing is both ignoring these fundamental flaws and leading to the view that the H-1B is ultimately a loss for America - a notion that seems too extreme."

This is a political issue.  Everytime the issue becomes part of the public discourse (often because of a journalist) people become more and more aware of the issue.  Politicians get an earful and it has an impact.

I think there is clearly good and bad press surrounding this issue.  This press is probably good press.  The press surrounding Tunnel Rat was probably bad press.  That was too much of a distraction from the core issue.

Although this doesn't attack key themes in the H-1b debate, it does bring it into the public discourse.  As well as other themes such as corporate resonsibilities when it comes to being good "corporate citizens".

I think the most politically effective theme is "Offshoring firms are using this visa to ship jobs to India - just look at (xyz) firm".  Stick with that theme and we get two key issues into the public discourse: offshoring and H-1b visas.

Feb 2, 2010 2:00 AM Kim Berry - Programmers Guild Kim Berry - Programmers Guild  says: in response to Indian_H1B

Hi Indian_H1b,

Who decides whether the "U.S. considers itself a true free market economy" - American citizens, or the fithy rich Senators who are lobbied by filther rich CEOs of multi-national corporations?

Personally I view it as free market, but only within the constraints of the U.S. borders.

I think we agree that truly open borders would be both a "race to the bottom" and that immigrants would flood into California until conditions were on par with the worst slums in the world. Already the rate of low-skilled, high birthrate immigrants is having a negative impact on our finances.

I don't consider hiring 9 H-1b when 10% unemployed qualified Americans are available to be a "minor point." It's a concrete example, when multiplied by 10,000 employers, is how the 85,000 H-1b cap gets hit every year - even in worst economy since 1930.

you speak of "enforcing gardrails" - the point is there are no gardrails until Congress passes some reforms. Currently the prevailing wage is a sham, the posting notice is a sham, and the language against third party sponsorship is a sham.

Feb 2, 2010 2:44 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to Kim Berry - Programmers Guild

The danger with your stance appears to be a totalitarian disregard for the value that those of us who follow the rules in the H-1B pipeline bring to the table. You cannot ignore that the "large and famous US university" graduates a disproportionately large number of foreign students earning graduate degrees in STEM fields. The H-1B is the only program that would enable them to continue to work in the US. Your question would probably be: "Why keep them here at all?"

Well, when I earned my graduate degree, it was completely paid for by a university fellowship and I was given a monthly stipend to cover my living expenses. Since I was an international student, the cost of my tuition was about 3 times what it would have been had I been a US resident of the state I went to school to.

It just seems illogical to me that the school decided to enroll me when they could have found it cheaper to admit a local resident instead. My conclusion was that my academic record to that point was a key selling point.

For the 2 years that I was in school, I estimate that yearly expenses were about $35,000 borne by the US tax payer. Doesn't it seem synergestic to retain a student like me in the US workforce so that I can do my bit to pay back to the American economy?

I have since invested another $100,000 into another good school earning a professional degree and a second graduate degree. I did so because the US education system is the best in the world. I make 6 digits and am in my early 30s. I pay my 40% in various taxes quite enthusiastically.

I am certainly not God's gift to America. But I like to think I contribute a healthy amount every day to a country that kindly adopted me and that has become my second home. This would not have happened without the H-1B.

Feb 2, 2010 3:26 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Kim Berry - Programmers Guild

Hi, Kim --

Here are my responses:

1. No, I would not have made that statement, because there's not enough information there to defend such a business decision. This is an extension of the train vs. hire challenge that a lot of companies are facing. I would say there needs to be a balance between the practice of hiring the skills and hiring people with great potential and training them. I've spoken with CIOs who say they're happy to let other companies hire the college grads and train them. While the practice of letting the other guys do the work and then nabbing their talent might save some training dollars, I doubt that it's a prudent business decision-healthy businesses need a healthy training environment. So I think it might well be the case that hiring 100 college grads would be a smarter business decision than hiring 100 people who already have the skills, regardless of whether those people are H-1B visa holders or not. Young people bring new ideas and new ways of doing things, and there's tremendous value in that.

2. If they're cheaper, that's an abuse of the H-1B program. I would continue to speak out against such abuse.

3. If a company finds that retention is a problem and that hiring H-1B visa holders helps to solve that problem, then as long as all of the rules and regulations are followed, I can accept that that could be a prudent business decision.

The point of my post was that getting up in arms over the Reliant Energy case, in which (based on the Computerworld article) there was no abuse of the system, is a needless distraction from focusing on the abuses that we all want to fight. I continue to have to think that the unprincipled operators of H-1B body shops have to be delighted that the president of the Programmers Guild is focusing his attention on a company that hired nine H-1B visa holders by following the rules.

Feb 2, 2010 3:29 AM Kim Berry - Programmers Guild Kim Berry - Programmers Guild  says: in response to Indian_H1B


Thank you for sharing your background.

My daughter graduated BS/MS civil engineering from top school USC in May 2009 with 3.8 GPA and all of the internships etc. Even so it took her eight months to find a job. Many of her classmates are still at Best Buy and such.

during her job search she encountered many H-1b/PERM sham ads and many positions that she would have been qualified for. With H-1b Congress sends a message to U.S. students "we don't want you - please study law or such."

The job market is very hard right now for U.S. STEM grads.

I don't think Programmers Guild has a "totalitarian stance." Our position is that H-1b should only be used in the very rare cases where no qualified American is available - at any price." Otherwise clearly H-1b is diluting the wages and opportunities for Americans. U.S. Congress is funded by and should represent the interests of U.S. citizens/workers.

If someone wants to argue that H-1b should be hired regardless of a stack of resumes from qualified U.S. applicants - as Congress currently allows - let's hear it.



Feb 2, 2010 4:28 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to Kim Berry - Programmers Guild

Au Contraire, it's Wall Street that has been weaning bright American students off STEM, not the (purported) plethora of H-1Bs. There are academic studies that prove that since 1990, a very large number of top decile US students that may otherwise have pursued STEM fields have been getting degrees in economics and business. When you can make $400,000 7 years into your investment banking career, why work your rear off getting a PhD that pays $90,000 a year at about the same time in your early career?

2009 was just a bad year. I'll glad your bright child got a job finally. I am willing to bet that if we had a way to design an experiment whereby we could compare 2 worlds -- one with 85,000 H-1Bs available each year, and one without -- the average time it took an American citizen to find a job in this economy would not be markedly different.

I really like to think 80% of all H-1Bs are enhacements to this economic landscape; not a stumbling block.

Feb 2, 2010 4:29 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Indian_H1B

"I am certainly not God's gift to America."

I give you points for being humble. 

"But I like to think I contribute a healthy amount every day to a country that kindly adopted me and that has become my second home. This would not have happened without the H-1B."

I personally don't think our nation should turn away immigrants like yourself.  However, the H-1b visa regime is not working to attract as many people like yourself - you are in the minority.  Most H-1b visa holders have a bachelors degree and 1-2 years of experience.  Most are very young and paid below market rates.

In short, there are smarter ways to attract people like you than with the H-1b visa.  My suggestion (which I know not everyone agrees with) was that the path be from F1 to GC for students attending American universities and graduating with a masters degree or higher.  I don't see a need to have a "non-immigrant visa" be part of this path.

Feb 2, 2010 4:34 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Don Tennant

" I continue to have to think that the unprincipled operators of H-1B body shops have to be delighted that the president of the Programmers Guild is focusing his attention on a company that hired nine H-1B visa holders by following the rules."

There are certainly "bigger fish" that we should focus on.  For example, the top sponsors of H-1b visas engaged in offshoring.  I don't think this was bad press, but agree that we could go after key problem makers more effectively.

Don, you seem to agree that the body shops are the "fly in the ointment".  Why don't you write an article about their role in the H-1b visa program - and who the biggest problem makers are?

Feb 2, 2010 6:22 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to R. Lawson

I think Businessweek carried a detailed account on this sometime late last year. I think the writer was Moira Herbst or Steve Hamm, but I may be mistaken.

The bodyshops are primarily flies in the ointment for legitimate Indian H-1Bs. By flooding the pipelines with their apps, they were making it hard for anyone else to apply...to the point that the H-1B became a lottery for a couple of years. A friend of mine had a 4.0 getting his MS from a top school, but went back to India since his H-1B app was not picked up in this farcical lottery. He's leading a 15-person engineering team in Bangalore now and quite happy.

Then, there are others like me who have been H-1Bs for 7 years and over who cannot get their greencards because these bodyshops have flooded those pipelines as well. That's just more fodder for those trying to make a case for the existence of too many H-1Bs out there. That my application was put in back in 2003 is often drowned out by their noisy outrage.

Feb 2, 2010 8:34 AM Peter Peter  says: in response to Indian_H1B

Below is a link to an article in an Indian magazine about Indian students in Australia being attacked.


A quote from the article 'Not only are these Indian students taking away the seats in colleges and universities, they are also taking away the jobs that could have gone to an Australian student. In addition, by staying back and getting a permanent residency in Australia, they are becoming a serious threat to white Australians in the job market.'

This is the same problem America is facing.  If Indian students from say the top 25 universities in the US News and World Report were allowed to stay back I doubt any one would complain. Since the early 1990's Indian students and H-1b's have slowly driven the locals out of the engineering profession. The universities are no longer able to attract top local talent because the students see what has happened to their parents careers since the H-1B influx started in the mid 1990's. American did fine until then without them.  When I went to college, including an Ivy League college,  in the early 80's there were Indian students but they were not the majority as now in many schools.  There are more than 100,000 Indian students coming to America every year. Most of them in STEM fields. It is highly unlikely that more than a few thousand would qualify as top talent. 

Feb 2, 2010 8:59 AM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says: in response to R. Lawson

One of the memory tussles in economic theory is the famous Keynesian vs Classical theories. Keynesians (like Krugman) would argue that Reliant ought to hire Americans to fill the jobs. Classical economists (any number from the Chicago school) would argue that Reliant should do everything in their power to make best on the $20 million that they now have because the government threw them a bone.

While the benefit of the Keynesian viewpoint is immediately apparent, it's not clear one can dismiss the other. By hiring the best people for the job, Reliant may be in a position to hire twice as many Americans tomorrow.

Hasn't the sustained success of this land been rooted in the successful separate of state and business?

Feb 2, 2010 9:02 AM Peter Peter  says: in response to Indian_H1B

The UK has temporarily suspended visas for Indian students from certain parts of India because they suspect a high rate of fraud. 

In the UK they are proposing changes to the law to prevent Indian students from staying after graduating.

If the Indian students from except the top 25 universities were sent back America would do just fine.  Contrary to what you state other countries are not laying down the welcome mat for Indian economic migrant labor.

Feb 2, 2010 9:37 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Indian_H1B

"Hasn't the sustained success of this land been rooted in the successful separate of state and business?"

Not really.  The economic collapse we just witnessed was a result of the government not intervening.

Government should regulate business.  The debate should be how much and in what mannger.  I would agree with the notion that government should not intervene too much.  The difficulty is determining what "too much" and "too little" are.

In this case, the H-1b is in fact government intervention.  It is a subsidy that was designed to correct a shortage of skilled workers.  That shortage no longer exists.

If one wants to argue that the government should not intervene, then apply that argument also to the H-1b visa.  That is a program which increases the supply of labor and disrupts the natural forces of the IT labor market.  It has resulted in lower salaries and companies no longer investing in the training of their workers.  Why train and educate when you can scour the globe for someone already trained?  Why pay market rates when you can import cheaper labor - and as a bonus drive down market rates?

It is a terrible thing for our profession because it goes against basic free market principles.  Workers on that visa don't have the same rights as other workers have, resulting in a form of indentured servitude.

The H-1b visa is government intervention in its crudest form.

Feb 2, 2010 9:42 AM P Henry P Henry  says: in response to Indian_H1B

   If state and business are so separate, why is Reliant taking the taxpayers money in the first place?

   Also, If more H-1B's equaled more work for Americans, that would be apparent by now since this program has been in use for several years.  Instead, the exact opposite has happened and wages have stagnated or declined in STEM fields.  You can try all of the justifications you like, the bottom line is still that this program destroys American jobs. 

Feb 2, 2010 9:52 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to P Henry

"this program has been in use for several years. "

Several decades, actually.

Feb 2, 2010 11:00 AM Bob Bob  says: in response to Indian_H1B

Indian H-1B,

Many H-1B visas are issued to fill entry-level jobs. If you look at any office environment with accountants, engineers, buyers etc., most of the folks - H-1B workers included - are just pigs in the trough trying to make a living. Worker bees. True genius is rare. At best the H-1B is just being used to import someone that may be a little smarter or work a little harder at modestly reduced salary. Maybe they're solid performers but chances are they're not the next Thomas Edison. In other cases there's no difference in ability, or in fact the H-1B worker is of inferior quality. So does it really make sense from a long-term policy perspective to create a class of unemployed Americans and discouraged American students (not to mention the negative affects of overpopulation) for marginal differences in performance? It's pathetically short-sighted in terms of the National interest.


Feb 2, 2010 12:17 PM debug debug  says:

First you want us to move other countries to find jobs.  Now Reliant has received 20 million of taxpayer and they should not use that to hire cheap foreign labor.

You are so Pro-H1b, even with millions of Americans unemployed.

Feb 2, 2010 12:42 PM PaulRever PaulRever  says:

Hi Mumbai Don,

If you are loyal to India why don't you just move there.  They will love you there.

Americans are aware that all your writings are hogwash and just pure Pro-H1b propaganda.

Feb 3, 2010 2:15 AM JRinColorado JRinColorado  says:

I see there is some CENSORING. I posted two comments yesterday and there are not there.

Care to explain?????

Feb 3, 2010 10:39 AM Kachina Shaw Kachina Shaw  says: in response to JRinColorado

Thank you for your participation. I found that this comment here, as well as two others from you, were held in the commenting system filter, and thus not immediately visible on the site, which happens occasionally. All three are now on the site.

Kachina Shaw

Editor in Chief

Jun 17, 2010 7:09 AM bouncy... bouncy...  says: in response to Dave Chapman

Dear Dave,

Do you know what civil rights did Blacks have in US in 1924.


Oct 5, 2012 10:00 AM PCSA PCSA  says: in response to Indian_H1B
I have worked side by side with many indians in the IT field since 1990. In 1992 there was one Indian in my IT group in Florida. He had studied accounting in India and came to the US under H1B with a "customized" resume stating that he had done a masters in computer science. He had taken a couple of Mainframe programming courses (just in case he was tested). He came to earn about half of what I was getting with dBase/Clipper programming. Was I surprised? yes, but I could not do anything, he was a consultant provided by a consulting firm 50% of whose employees were Indians. The company I was working for did not have to check his credentials. That was the responsibility of the consulting company. As long as the consulting company tells its clients that they do credential checks or background checks.. that's it. He was a good Cobol-CICS programmer, but I could not believe there were no good US Citizen Cobol-CICS programmers. Then I went to NY and witnessed how gradually the IT group was replaced by Indians, first DBAs, then programmers, then some analysts.. This was prevalent in the Wall street companies and even in some law firms. I know they were not and are not PHDs. Reply
Oct 5, 2012 10:33 AM PCSA PCSA  says: in response to Dave Chapman
There is no reason to say that we are anti-immigration, but the primary responsibility of the politicians, those who are elected by US Citizens is precisely the US Citizens, who will continue to elect them. The US Citizens are being betrayed by the politicians who make the laws, allowing companies to massively replace US trained Citizens with less qualified non US Citizens, mostly Indians in the IT and some other engineering fields, because at some point they were advertised as bright and intelligent (more than their US counterparts). Think about this: If there is such thing as World-Citizen who should have the same rights everywhere.. Well, start by raising their salaried in India/China to the same salary levels we have here in the US, then eliminate the need for passports and let them all decide whether to come to the US so all types of jobs are filled by them, including teachers, police, lawyers, doctors, reporters, politicians, mayors, district congressmen, governors, senators, well for president they would have to wait a couple of generations, unless the law is changed. Just see Louisiana, S Carolina. we'll see more of this and that group being favored more. Reply

Post a comment





(Maximum characters: 1200). You have 1200 characters left.



Subscribe to our Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.