That's certainly not in the spirit of the program. I am generally not a fan of Ted Cruz but the proposal he made that there should be a minimum salary of 120k (not sure if this is right) makes sense to me. Or maybe limit the number of H-1B visas a company can get to 100 or so. Or even better: Give H-1B workers a green card after a year so they can change companies. That way they couldn't be held captive for low wages.
Then the H1B will only be used by tech companies, which is also not in the spirit of the program. If there are phenomenal marine biologist, who generally do not make 120k, they should be able to use the program.
If we allow H1B employees to switch jobs two or three times
within their industry without any extra paper works or fees, then these outsourcing companies will think twice before importing engineers and chaining them to their H1Bs.
"If there are phenomenal marine biologist, who generally do not make 120k, they should be able to use the program."
Why should a employers be assisted by the government in their efforts to hire high talented people for low salaries? Even marine biologists?
Here's how I look at it - immigration to the US is limited, current levels are about 1.2 million a year. These immigrants are similar to US citizens in that they can choose and change their career paths without fear of deportation. If the phenomenal marine biologist you've described decides she'd rather be a programmer, or a dental hygienist, or drop out of the work force for a while to pursue a dream, or open a sandwich shop, she is free to do so. The employer, of course, is free to increase her salary and improve her working conditions to convince her to remain a marine biologist.
Or.. the employer could gain control over her right to reside in the US and gain an employee who faces deportation if she fails to remain a marine biologist in her employer's good graces. That'll keep her in the job at the salary and working conditions the employer has decided are fair.
Hey, if you ask the market and you don't like the answer, have the government ask again on your behalf, right?
Why only allow H1B's to switch jobs "within their industry"? Why allow employers to decide who gets to come to the US and who doesn't? Should someone who nods and agrees with an employer about test-driven development and agrees to reverse a binary tree at a whiteboard have a greater right to live and work in the US than someone who doesn't? I won't do this anymore, and the cynical part of me thinks that these coercive employer controlled visa programs are really meant to create a huge population of developers who can't stand up to their employers, not because they need a job, but because they don't want to be deported.
None of this works, in my opinion. Whatever our immigration system is, I don't think that employers controlling who gets to come here and the conditions under which they are allowed to remain works. I think it creates bad market distortions and is an affront to personal freedom.
As for the PhD's specifically, really, there is almost no justification for these low salaries, other than that people seem to be willing to accept them. If it's hard to convince young people to become marine biologists rather than dentists, because they don't like the idea of 7 year PhD programs with 50% attrition rates that result in low salaries and uncertain job security... well, sounds like a perfectly rational market response to me. If someone with the freedom to choose wants to do it, fine, but why would we want to empower employers to use the immigration system to coerce people into these jobs?
Thanks! They even use the same 15% which I just made up.
IMHO. A hard limit would be better since it is still and abuse of the program even if it is within the law. The spirit of the program is also about bringing diversity (national origin as well as occupation)
