Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Arnold for Governor! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (134)	8/13/2003 4:29:07 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 773

The L-1 visa category allows companies to bring in managerial talent from affiliates overseas. That is crucial for companies operating offices in more than one country. Our company has execs in several other countries, but after a certain point if they want to get promoted the only higher jobs are in the U.S. parent organization. If those are closed off due to L-1 restrictions, talented people will be less likely to consider or stay with U.S. affiliated companies, and those jobs will ultimately go to candidates that the U.S. company considers to be less qualified. Not just the U.S. managerial jobs, but all of the jobs at overseas affiliates that might serve as a ladder to the U.S. managerial jobs. Talented candidates will start avoiding U.S.-affiliated companies if that happens. I fail to see how that is a good thing for America or American companies. The H1-B category is more difficult. The hassle involved in setting it up is a deterrent from employers using these visas when they are not needed anyway, and having the surplus talent in tight labor markets is good for U.S. business when there are employee shortages. I don't really see those as an immigration issue so much as a business and regulatory issue. The intent of the H1-B is not to allow someone to immigrate but rather to allow them to come and work here because they have a special skill to contribute which is in short supply here. Administered properly -- that is, limited to skills which are special and in short supply -- it is a good concept and good for our economy IMO. I tend to be pro-immigration anyway, but it seems to me to confuse the issue to call it an "immigration" issue. With an H1-B visa you aren't supposed to stay unless the requirements (special skill in shortage) continue to be met. Of course, many do stay, often by marrying citizens once they get here. There is a thriving marketplace among those nationalities with lots of H1-B holders for potential spouses who have citizenship or green cards already and thus can serve as a conduit to U.S. citizenship by the H1-B holder. But the same can and does occur with student and tourist visa holders too, and also with people who don't come here at all but manage to find spouses who are citizens through arranged marriages and the like. It would be a shame if a rising tide of anti-immigration fervor in the U.S. -- which I haven't noticed BTW -- causes us to lose our ability to attract talented people from other countries. I would rather see us rewrite our immigration policies to attract talented people and keep out riff raff. <g> All of this on a thread about a guy running for governor who emigrated from Austria to become an American many years ago.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (134)	8/13/2003 6:36:52 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 773

Definitely but the visas are gone. Uh, the technical job market started diving THREE YEARS AGO and H1-B's are still being issued. Wanna bet by the time the bill to terminate them hits the floor of Congress, the job market will have turned around and THAT will be used as an excuse not to terminate them? They were setup to deal with a shortage not to undermine pay. If you believe THAT, I'll sell you the Golden Gate Bridge. I've got the deed in my back pocket. Of course they did undermine pay but that was not the original intent. Yes, of course they did. And I'm sure that they would have that effect NEVER EVEN CROSSED THE MINDS of the CEOs pushing them, right?