Dozen Articles Worth Reading
Dozen Articles Worth Reading
Date: Thursday, March 30, 2006 1:30 AM
JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER
March 30, 2006 No. 1449
<<< COMMENTS FROM ROB >>>
Carlini's op-ed (#6) is so well thought out it explains why he will never
be a highly paid syndicated columnist. Questions like this just aren't
allowed in the mainstream media: "How can U.S. IT workers be considered not
as skilled as their foreign counterparts when companies tell them they are
overqualified when they apply for jobs?"
For those that think this newsletter tends to be too negative, read #7 for
some good news.
Most newspaper articles are calling on Congress to raise H-1B but the
Mercury News idiotorial (#8) was so bad it turned on my CompeteAmerica
alarm bell. I decided to see if it was a CompeteAmerica plant. Bingo!
http://www.competeamerica.org/editorials/index.html
CompeteAmerica sure has been busy. They also managed to plant iditorials in
the Wall Street Journal and the Investor's Business Daily.
Let's all give CompeteAmerica a hand for the best shilling in the USA -
just make sure it's the back of your hand! Be sure to read their "fact
sheet" by going to:
http://www.competeamerica.org/resource/senate_advocacy.pdf
#11 - Have any of you been following what's going on in France? Hundreds of
thousands of people are rioting because the government wants to make labor
laws to be more like the U.S. If French Prime Minister Dominique de
Villepin wants the corporatists to succeed in France, he needs to find out
what is in the kool-aid Americans are drinking, and fast!
<<< END OF COMMENTS >>>
Article 1:
http://www.computerworld.com/careertopics/careers/story/0,10801,109859,00.html
H-1Being Professional
Rather than going head-to-head with your competitors with strength and
confidence in the value of what you have to offer, you focus on peripheral
measures aimed at eliminating your competitors so you don't have to deal
with them. For years that mind-set has pervaded our response to the
competitive threat posed by foreign IT workers: We don't like having to
compete with these people, so let's devote ourselves to making them just go
away. What a waste. What if all the energy that has been expended on
restricting H-1B visas had instead been directed toward raising the value
of what it is we have to contribute?
Article 2:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/14196222.htm
A three-step plan to save our endangered middle class
In case you've been worrying about how the war in Iraq will end, or the
coming of avian flu, or the extinction of the universe as we drift into the
cosmic void, well, relax. Here's something you should really fret about:
the future of the U.S. economy in the age of globalization. And according
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the proportion of jobs in the United
States that require a college degree will rise by a measly one percentage
point -- from 26.9 percent in 2002 to 27.9 percent in 2012 -- during this
decade.
Article 3:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032101146.html?referrer=emailarticle
We Don't Need 'Guest Workers'
President Bush says his guest worker program would "match willing foreign
workers with willing American employers, when no Americans can be found to
fill the jobs." But at some higher wage, there would be willing Americans.
Article 4:
http://www.washtech.org/news/legislative/display.php?ID_Content=5045
Q & A with Marcus Courtney on H1-B visas
I think that Bill Gates spends a lot more time working this issue and
others than people realize. What was interesting was how visible he was
lobbying on this issue: the full-court press with interviews, meetings,
talking with David Broder of the Washington Post, and Rep. Nancy Pelosis
staff (D-CA). Everyone was talking about Bill Gates visit, and he had a
single-minded focus on this issue.
Article 5:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060328/ap_on_go_co/immigration_high_tech
Immigration Debate
High-tech firms eager to import more engineers, computer buffs and other
skilled workers are waiting anxiously to see if their needs will be met as
Congress grapples with overhauling immigration law.
Article 6:
http://www.eprairie.com/news/viewnews.asp?newsletterID=14082
H-1B Reform: Real Reason U.S. Uses Foreign Labor is Cost Savings
How can U.S. IT workers be considered not as skilled as their foreign
counterparts when companies tell them they are overqualified when they
apply for jobs? The real reason U.S. companies solicit foreign labor is the
money they save, writes adjunct Northwestern professor James Carlini.
Article 7:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1468230.cms
First hurdle is over for H-1B hopefuls
For H-1B visa hopefuls, the first hurdles been crossed. The US Senate
Judiciary Committee has approved an immigration bill by a 12-6 vote. But
the good news doesnt end here.
Article 8:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/14212114.htm
Proposed expansion of H-1B visas is long overdue
The increase in the number of visas for skilled tech workers, part of a
broader immigration bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, is an
important step to boost America's and Silicon Valley's competitiveness.
Article 9:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1468378.cms
US law to hike H1B visas for Indians
The white collar Indians American dream is poised to get a boost
following the passage in the US Senate Judiciary Committee of an
immigration bills that hikes the H1-B visa quota from the current 65,000 to
115,000 annually. The H1-B hike is part of the omnibus immigration reform
bill aimed at legalising some 11 million illegal aliens in the United
States and allowing 400,000 guest workers into the country, subject to
conditions.
Article 10:
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14172371
Senate panel vote for increase in H-1B visa
The Senate Judiciary Committee of the United States has voted to
significantly increase the number of H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign
workers as part of a controversial immigration Bill that faces a tough
fight in the Congress before it becomes law.
Article 11:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060329.wxcoparis29/BNStory/specialComment/home
Revolutionize France's labour laws
The streets are alive with the sound of solidarity. Hundreds of thousands
of people have marched in Paris alone to protest French Prime Minister
Dominique de Villepin's "CPE" law (Contrat premihre embauche, or First
Job Contract).
The CPE is seen as heralding the end of the good old days of life-long job
security, and the advent of a more "American" labour market, with its easy
hiring and firing.
Article 12:
(You must click the link to read the article)
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/060325_nd.htm
The Physics Of Teacher Shortages
By Edwin S. Rubenstein
In total U.S. schools hire about 10,000 teachers a year from foreign
countries, according to the National Education Association.
1. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.computerworld.com/careertopics/careers/story/0,10801,109859,00.html
H-1Being Professional
Opinion by Don Tennant
MARCH 27, 2006 (COMPUTERWORLD) - If you want to keep yourself and your
company competitive in an economy that's getting more global with every
sunrise in the East, to what should you devote your energy? What causes or
initiatives should you champion?
For far too long, far too many in the U.S. IT community have taken an
approach that's disturbingly '90s-Microsoftesque: Rather than going
head-to-head with your competitors with strength and confidence in the
value of what you have to offer, you focus on peripheral measures aimed at
eliminating your competitors so you don't have to deal with them.
For years that mind-set has pervaded our response to the competitive threat
posed by foreign IT workers: We don't like having to compete with these
people, so let's devote ourselves to making them just go away.
What a waste. What if all the energy that has been expended on restricting
H-1B visas had instead been directed toward raising the value of what it is
we have to contribute? Do we even know how to go about accomplishing the
latter?
IT executives with successful global operations do. They know it's all
about innovation.
I recently spoke with Larry Buettner, CIO at automotive fleet management
services provider Wheels Inc., about the challenges he's confronting in
synthesizing IT operations in 10 countries in Europe. Buettner, a 2006
Computerworld Premier 100 honoree, was reflecting on what it takes to be
competitive in that kind of environment. Top of mind, he said, is this:
"How do you continue to innovate in dealing with so many of the
complexities of these different countries?" He's not worried about how to
deprive anyone else of the opportunity to compete. He's focused on how to
continue to innovate.
As cool as that is, it's one thing when one CIO and one company gets it.
It's something else altogether when a large, high-profile organization of
technology professionals gets it.
In case you missed it, Computerworld's Patrick Thibodeau reported last week
that IEEE-USA has announced plans to create what it's calling an
"Innovation Institute" as part of an ongoing program to provide advanced
training to U.S. workers (see IEEE-USA plans 'Innovation Institute' to help
keep jobs in U.S.). With a mission to keep U.S. employees competitive in
the global technology job market, the institute is being aimed at
high-potential students who can learn from one another, according to
IEEE-USA President Ralph Wyndrum.
IEEE-USA, a longtime foe of H-1B visas, remains staunchly opposed to
raising the current cap of 65,000. A bill being debated by the Senate
Judiciary Committee that would raise the cap to 115,000 would only make "a
bad situation worse," Wyndrum says.
Whether you agree with that assessment or not, you have to give Wyndrum and
his organization credit for at least making some positive proposals beyond
the knee-jerk rants that we typically hear from H-1B opponents when an
increase to the cap is proposed.
Aside from creating the Innovation Institute, IEEE-USA has demonstrated
that its opposition to H-1B visas is not driven by a strategy to deprive
foreign workers of the opportunity to compete for technology jobs in the
U.S. The organization's position is that a preferable course of action
would be to make it easier for foreign workers to gain permanent residency
in the U.S.
It's difficult not to respect that position. It's one that was eloquently
articulated in a column written for Computerworld in November by Gerard A.
Alphonse, the 2005 president of IEEE-USA and a fellow of the IEEE. Alphonse
should know what he's talking about.
He emigrated here from Haiti.
2. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/14196222.htm
Posted on Mon, Mar. 27, 2006
A three-step plan to save our endangered middle class
By Harold Meyerson
In case you've been worrying about how the war in Iraq will end, or the
coming of avian flu, or the extinction of the universe as we drift into the
cosmic void, well, relax. Here's something you should really fret about:
the future of the U.S. economy in the age of globalization.
For a discussion of same, let me call your attention to an article in the
March-April issue of Foreign Affairs by Princeton University economist Alan
Blinder. The vice chair of the Federal Reserve's board of governors from
1994 to 1996, Blinder is the most mainstream of economists, which makes his
squawk of alarm all the more jarring. But the man has crunched the numbers,
and what he's found is sure to induce queasiness.
In the new global order, Blinder writes, not just manufacturing jobs but a
large number of service jobs will be performed in cheaper climes. Indeed,
only hands-on or face-to-face services look safe. ``Janitors and crane
operators are probably immune to foreign competition,'' Blinder writes,
``accountants and computer programmers are not.''
There follow some back-of-the-envelope calculations as Blinder adds up the
number of jobs in tradable and non-tradable sectors. Then comes his
(necessarily imprecise) bottom line:
``The total number of current U.S. service-sector jobs that will be
susceptible to offshoring in the electronic future is two to three times
the total number of current manufacturing jobs (which is about 14
million).''
As Blinder believes that all those manufacturing jobs are offshorable, too,
the grand total of American jobs that could be bound for Bangalore or
Bangladesh is somewhere between 42 million and 56 million. That doesn't
mean all those jobs are going to be exported. It does mean that the
Americans performing them will be in competition with people who will do
the same work for a whole lot less.
The threat of globalization and the reality of de-unionization have
combined to make the raise, for most Americans, a thing of the past.
Between 2001 and 2004, median household income inched up by a meager 1.6
percent, even as productivity was expanding at a robust 11.7 percent. The
broadly shared prosperity that characterized our economy in the three
decades after World War II is now dead as a dodo.
Also dying, if not yet also kaput, is the comforting notion that a good
education is the best defense against the ravages of globalization -- or,
as Bill Clinton famously put it: What you earn is the result of what you
learn.
A study last year by economists J. Bradford Jensen of the Institute for
International Economics and Lori Kletzer of the University of
California-Santa Cruz demonstrates that it's the more highly skilled
service-sector workers who are likely to have tradable jobs.
And according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the proportion of jobs in
the United States that require a college degree will rise by a measly one
percentage point -- from 26.9 percent in 2002 to 27.9 percent in 2012 --
during this decade.
Since education as such won't save us, Blinder recommends a kind of
particularized vocational ed. We will have to specialize more, he writes,
``in the delivery of services where personal presence is either imperative
or highly beneficial. Thus, the U.S. workforce of the future will likely
have more divorce lawyers and fewer attorneys who write routine
contracts.'' Now, there's a prospect to galvanize a nation.
My own sense is that nothing short of a radical reordering of our economy
will suffice if we're to save our beleaguered middle-class majority.
Every other advanced economy -- certainly those of the Europeans and the
Japanese -- has a conscious strategy to keep its most highly skilled jobs
at home. We have none; American capitalism, dominated by our financial
sector, is uniquely wedded to disaggregating companies, thwarting
unionization campaigns and offshoring work in a ceaseless campaign to
impress investors that it has found the cheapest labor imaginable.
So, here are three immodest suggestions:
We need to entice industry to invest at home by having the government
and our public- and union-controlled pension funds upgrade the
infrastructure and invest in energy efficiency and worker training.
We need to unionize and upgrade the skills of the nearly 50 million
private-sector workers in health care, transportation, construction,
retail, restaurants and the like whose jobs can't be shipped abroad.
And, if America is to survive American capitalism in the age of
globalization, we need to alter the composition of our corporate boards so
that employee and public representatives can limit the offshoring of our
economy.
That failing, here come more divorce lawyers.
3. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032101146.html?referrer=emailarticle
We Don't Need 'Guest Workers'
By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, March 22, 2006; A21
Economist Philip Martin of the University of California likes to tell a
story about the state's tomato industry. In the early 1960s, growers relied
on seasonal Mexican laborers, brought in under the government's "bracero"
program. The Mexicans picked the tomatoes that were then processed into
ketchup and other products. In 1964 Congress killed the program despite
growers' warnings that its abolition would doom their industry. What
happened? Well, plant scientists developed oblong tomatoes that could be
harvested by machine. Since then, California's tomato output has risen
fivefold.
It's a story worth remembering, because we're being warned again that we
need huge numbers of "guest workers" -- meaning unskilled laborers from
Mexico and Central America -- to relieve U.S. "labor shortages." Indeed,
the shortages will supposedly worsen as baby boomers retire. President Bush
wants an open-ended program. Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John
McCain (R-Ariz.) advocate initially admitting 400,000 guest workers
annually. The Senate is considering these and other plans.
Gosh, they're all bad ideas.
Guest workers would mainly legalize today's vast inflows of illegal
immigrants, with the same consequence: We'd be importing poverty. This
isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking; many are. Nor is it
because they don't assimilate; many do. But they generally don't go home,
assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished.
Since 1980 the number of Hispanics with incomes below the government's
poverty line (about $19,300 in 2004 for a family of four) has risen 162
percent. Over the same period, the number of non-Hispanic whites in poverty
rose 3 percent and the number of blacks, 9.5 percent. What we have now --
and would with guest workers -- is a conscious policy of creating poverty
in the United States while relieving it in Mexico. By and large, this is a
bad bargain for the United States. It stresses local schools, hospitals and
housing; it feeds social tensions (witness the Minutemen). To be sure, some
Americans get cheap housecleaning or landscaping services. But if more
mowed their own lawns or did their own laundry, it wouldn't be a tragedy.
The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would
ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers. The two aren't
close substitutes for each other. Among immigrant Mexican and Central
American workers in 2004, only 7 percent had a college degree and nearly 60
percent lacked a high school diploma, according to the Congressional Budget
Office. Among native-born U.S. workers, 32 percent had a college degree and
only 6 percent did not have a high school diploma. Far from softening the
social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate
them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited
government benefits.
It's a myth that the U.S. economy "needs" more poor immigrants. The illegal
immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor
force, the Pew Hispanic Center reports. In no major occupation are they a
majority. They're 36 percent of insulation workers, 28 percent of drywall
installers and 20 percent of cooks. They're drawn here by wage differences,
not labor "shortages." In 2004, the median hourly wage in Mexico was $1.86,
compared with $9 for Mexicans working in the United States, said Rakesh
Kochhar of Pew. With high labor turnover in the jobs they take, most new
illegal immigrants can get work by accepting wages slightly below
prevailing levels.
Hardly anyone thinks that most illegal immigrants will leave. But what
would happen if new illegal immigration stopped and wasn't replaced by
guest workers? Well, some employers would raise wages to attract U.S.
workers. Facing greater labor costs, some industries would -- like the
tomato growers in the 1960s -- find ways to minimize those costs. As to the
rest, what's wrong with higher wages for the poorest workers? From 1994 to
2004, the wages of high school dropouts rose only 2.3 percent (after
inflation) compared with 11.9 percent for college graduates.
President Bush says his guest worker program would "match willing foreign
workers with willing American employers, when no Americans can be found to
fill the jobs." But at some higher wage, there would be willing Americans.
The number of native high school dropouts with jobs declined by 1.3 million
from 2000 to 2005, estimates Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration
Studies, which favors less immigration. Some lost jobs to immigrants.
Unemployment remains high for some groups (9.3 percent for African
Americans, 12.7 percent for white teenagers).
Business organizations understandably support guest worker programs. They
like cheap labor and ignore the social consequences. What's more perplexing
is why liberals, staunch opponents of poverty and inequality, support a
program that worsens poverty and inequality. Poor immigrant workers hurt
the wages of unskilled Americans. The only question is how much. Studies
suggest a range "from negligible to an earnings reduction of almost 10
percent," according to the CBO.
It's said that having guest workers is better than having poor illegal
immigrants. With legal status, they'd have rights and protections. They'd
have more peace of mind and face less exploitation by employers. This would
be convincing if its premise were incontestable: that we can't control our
southern border. But that's unproved. We've never tried a policy of real
barriers and strict enforcement against companies that hire illegal
immigrants. Until that's shown to be ineffective, we shouldn't adopt guest
worker programs that don't solve serious social problems -- but add to
them.
4. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.washtech.org/news/legislative/display.php?ID_Content=5045
March 28, 2006
WashTech News
Q & A with Marcus Courtney on H1-B visas
By Jeff Nachtigal for WashTech News
WashTech President Marcus Courtney attended a CWA conference in Washington
D.C. in March, just as details about Rep. Arlen Specters (R-Penn.) plan
to expand the H1-B guest worker program to 115,000 visas were released.
Meanwhile, WashTech is focused on promoting Rep. Bill Pascrells (D-NJ)
H1-B reform bill, which would cap visas at the present number of 65,000,
and add reporting requirements for companies that hire workers through this
program.
That same week, Microsoft founder Bill Gates was also in Washington D.C. to
promote expanding the H1-B visa program. Courtney talked about the week in
Washington, the mood in Congress, and the next several months in the debate
over H1-B visas.
WashTech News: What did you learn in Washington D.C.?
Courtney: It was a good week because Bill Gates was back there at the same
time, talking on the other side about why they (Microsoft and other
high-tech companies) need more guest workers.
One thing we learned is that this is really a debate that isnt dealing
with facts. When you raise the H1-B issue with people, they have no
understanding of what is really true or not about the program, how the
program works, or the true labor conditions for high-tech workers.
Is there really a worker shortage? That argument works because the
high-tech industry, in the person of Bill Gates, runs around saying it. So
Congress now thinks this is true. But they dont have any basis for this,
no numbers, no facts.
WashTech News: What was it like to be talking about the H1-B visa issue at
the same time as Bill Gates?
Courtney: I think that Bill Gates spends a lot more time working this issue
and others than people realize. What was interesting was how visible he was
lobbying on this issue: the full-court press with interviews, meetings,
talking with David Broder of the Washington Post, and Rep. Nancy Pelosis
staff (D-CA). Everyone was talking about Bill Gates visit, and he had a
single-minded focus on this issue.
The timing for us was incredible, to be there to give a counterweight to
what Gates is saying. We were there saying, This is our position on the
issue, and hes off the mark, the shortage is not backed up by whats
really happening in the labor market. And people really listened.
WashTech News: You said that in 2005 companies were freer to talk about
offshoring because it wasnt an election year. How does the election in
November 2006 change things?
Courtney: This was the first time in a number of years that representatives
and staff were engaged with us and followed up on our concerns. I see this
as a real opportunity in the election year, as politicians know that Bill
Gates is only one vote. If their constituents email and communicate with
Congress right now, we can defeat corporate attempts to have unlimited
access to workers everywhere.
The actual balance of power right now is with the workers and not the
employers because its an election year. This is why the industry is
trying to do a full-court press now. They read polls, they know American
workers are concerned about job security, and people fundamentally know
H1-B undermines workers. Not only U.S. workers, but also guest workers,
because there are only so many high-tech jobs that are being created.
WashTech News: Whats the mood like in Congress these days?
Courtney: Congress knows people are very concerned about their jobs and the
economy, and now Congress members are very in tune with voters on this
issue, and want to respond to them. They want to show voters that they are
concerned about jobs, and are providing jobs for American workers.
You can see that with the port deal. That was really about outsourcing. I
think this (H1-B) is a very similar issue. At the same time this debate is
happening, GM announced the cuts of thousands of engineers, and the
American public sees this.
WashTech News: Will H1-B turn into a big election year issue?
Courtney: Clearly the offshoring and outsourcing issues exploded in the
2004 election. Now theres a real foothold on these issues, and this
debate on inshoring builds on that.
One thing thats been different: if you take a look at who is signed onto
the reform bill, the majority of the co-sponsors represent minority
districts. Rep. Major Owens in New York represents many African Americans,
Rep. Maxine Waters in Los Angeles represents a large African-American
district, and in Connecticut, Rep. Johnsons district is predominantly
African-American.
Its a huge change to have five initial co-sponsors representing minority
voices and women. It says there is growing concern in this new economy
about jobs, and the idea that the opportunity to get people into positions
with high wages is slipping away from people of color and women.
Who should get the opportunities? Should they go to guest workers, or to
Americans, especially woman and people of color?
Thats very different, because all of a sudden this issue isnt just
associated with a 50-year old white male programmer, now its about
opportunity for more people, High-tech has always been promised as a great
leveler in the workplace for minorities and women, and now its
minorities and women who are championing this issue.
WashTech News: Whats your response to people who say arguing against
increasing the H-1B visa cap is isolationist?
Courtney: Nobody is talking about eliminating the program. The idea of
allowing for some level of immigration and trying to give flexibility to
employers to recruit all over the world, thats fine. We dont have any
disagreement with that.
The problem is employers are overstating their need. They have no trouble
recruiting super talent, but what they are really trying to do is create an
excess supply of workers to drive down wages. And thats really what the
issue is, the motives of employers that you have to consider. Why recruit
that many workers? To drive down wages.
Nobody really knows what goes on with the program. There are a lot of
guesstimates as to how many people working under H-1B visas are in the
country. Theres no real accounting of what goes on with the H-1B workers
once theyre here.
WashTech News: Would you lower the current 65,000 cap on H1-B visas?
Courtney: You cant go below 65,000 because of the WTO (World Trade
Organization). Thats the lowest it can go. In reality Congress will
never go below that because they wont want to take on a challenge from
the WTO. What we really have to do is strengthen the protections for the
program, and ensure that we are working with actual numbers.
WashTech News: Is Congress willing to consider the Pascrell bill?
Courtney: In Washington State, the majority in Congress is not in favor of
the bill at this point. They are not clamoring to sign on to it, because
all they hear from employers is that there is a worker shortage, and that
employers pay the prevailing wage. And they never ask the employers to back
up what they say with facts.
WashTech News: Apart from the H-1B issue, what are some things Congress
could do to help U.S. workers?
Courtney: Reform around the L1 visas because they are completely
unregulated. That is dead right now, and we need a renewed focus on that
reform.
Another thing is worker training. Part of the argument for the H-1B program
is that employees dont have the skills, but employers are not investing
in their incumbent workers training. As for retraining and upgrading the
skills of employees doing the work, the industry assumes they have no
responsibility, and there is no discussion around that issue.
There is no training mentioned on the latest programs. And the fact that no
one is looking at the investments high-tech companies are making in
third-world labor markets, thats a huge issue that needs to be talked
about.
WashTech News: Bill Gates recently noted a Bureau of Labor statistic that
there is a 3% unemployment rate for computer and math professionals. He
said people in those fields could find jobs.
Courtney: The (unemployment) rates are higher in those fields than what
they have traditionally been in the past. And the unemployment rate is
based on people who are unemployed and seeking work. But if youre
unemployed and not seeking work, or youre working at Home Depot while
you look, thats not reflected, so that statistic is skewed.
The better question is: Why isnt the number at zero if theres so much
demand for those workers? Its basic economics. If there is such a
serious shortage as (Gates) says, why is there any unemployment in the
field?
WashTech News: Whats the timeline for the two bills in Congress?
Courtney: Where were at now is two issues, the immigration reform bill
moving through Congress and now the expansion on H1-B visas. They will
probably be voted on in the next three or four months.
Even if Congress passes the expansion, by also passing the Pascrell reform
bill; if there is enough support around the reform bill, they can reverse
any previous decision to expand the H1-B program.
Basically, if we "lose this season," well still have an opportunity next
season to correct the problem with the Pascrell Bill.
This is the strongest H1-B reform bill ever introduced in Congress, and
thats the difference; we have a solution. Before, we said there was a
problem, but now we have a bill that we can talk to people about; if we
work hard theres no reason we cant have 150 or 200 co-sponsors behind
this bill in next six months, but only if enough people talk to their
Congress members about this.
This is a much more strategic approach than just clamoring about the
problem. Were not saying take action seven months from now, because
its not going to have as much impact as now. Thats very different
from where we were 2, 3, 4 years ago.
Its a real opportunity for people to get involved, and have a metric
measuring what progress is being made.
5. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060328/ap_on_go_co/immigration_high_tech
Tech Firms Eye Immigration Debate By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer
Tue Mar 28, 7:18 AM ET
High-tech firms eager to import more engineers, computer buffs and other
skilled workers are waiting anxiously to see if their needs will be met as
Congress grapples with overhauling immigration law.
As senators began work Monday on an immigration bill, officials from tech
companies, universities and trade groups gathered in a Senate meeting room
to tick off some of their top priorities: adding more visas for high-tech
workers and making it easier for tech-savvy foreign students to come to the
U.S. and stay.
They aren't the issues that have grabbed headlines, like fencing off the
U.S.-Mexico border or what to do with the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants already in this country. But high-tech officials say they are
essential at a time when the U.S. is creating more technology jobs but
producing fewer college and university graduates with engineering degrees.
"I have trouble filling high-tech jobs in remote areas, and even in
metropolitan areas finding the right person," said Woody Sessums, a vice
president at Cisco Systems, Inc. "We want the very smartest, the most
high-level engineers to come here and stay, and we have to compete
globally."
Sessums was among the speakers at a Monday forum organized by the
University of California Washington Center, the California Institute for
Federal Policy Research and TechNet, a high-tech lobby group.
An immigration bill the House passed in December did not contain any of the
main provisions high-tech companies are seeking. They are more hopeful
about what might come out of the Senate, although the two measures would
then have to be reconciled.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has proposed
allowing more of the popular H1-B visas that go to high-tech workers.
Congress capped the six-year H-1B visas at 65,000 per year in 2004, and for
the past few years that cap has been met even before the beginning of each
fiscal year.
Specter would increase the cap to 115,000, with more increases possible
depending on demand.
"We don't have enough homegrown scientists and people who are well-trained
in math and science, and what happens is those jobs are offshored or
outsourced to places like India and China," Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio,
voting record), R-Texas, said as the Judiciary Committee debated the issue
Monday. "It represents a real challenge to American competitiveness."
Specter's legislation also would change how foreign students are dealt
with, creating a new visa for students in science, technology, engineering
and math and allowing them to take a job after they graduate and apply for
permanent residency. Currently foreign students must pledge to leave the
U.S. after completing their studies.
"A lot of that innovation, talent and invention is now pushed to other
countries," said Tod Loofbourrow, president and chief executive of
Authoria, Inc., a Massachusetts company that focuses on recruitment and
work force productivity.
The Judiciary Committee passed Specter's bill Monday and the full Senate
was expected to take it up Tuesday.
"Hopefully there's enough support in the Senate for this that we can get
this through while they're arguing about the other issues," said Victor
Johnson, associate executive director at the Association of International
Educators.
6. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.eprairie.com/news/viewnews.asp?newsletterID=14082
H-1B Reform: Real Reason U.S. Uses Foreign Labor is Cost Savings
Published on 3/29/2006
Carlinis Comments, ePrairies oldest column, runs every Wednesday. Its
mission is to offer the common mans view on business and technology
issues while questioning the leadership and visions of "pseudo" experts.
CHICAGO - How can U.S. IT workers be considered not as skilled as their
foreign counterparts when companies tell them they are overqualified when
they apply for jobs? The real reason U.S. companies solicit foreign labor
is the money they save, writes adjunct Northwestern professor James
Carlini.
As more people are very concerned about their jobs and others taking them
(for reasons ranging from they are better skilled to they are just cheaper
to hire), lets talk about H-1B openings again.
Contrary to the great employment numbers blared out on news programs every
week, there are many people who are still out of work in the IT and telecom
areas. Going from a $90,000 job at Motorola in 2001 to jobs paying no more
than $27,000 in the last five years, a reader asked me if the economy has
really gotten any better. It hasnt for him. For others, it is turning
dark as well in various industries.
Better Skilled or Just Cheaper Labor?
In a recent InfoWorld article by David Margulius, he asks if the U.S. can
stay on the throne of IT
(http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/03/24/76663_13OPanalysts_1.html ). He
starts out by saying:
Should we really care if the U.S. falls behind in IT? Some argue that tech
is the only sustainable lead we have on the rest of the world and its
worth holding on to. Others say were so far ahead economically and
militarily that we could lose a lot of altitude in 20 to 30 years and still
maintain some kind of edge.
Staying on the throne? I think America is being flushed down in the name of
cost reduction. Now that GM and Ford are being hit by bad sales, perhaps
the government will wake up. Still, it doesnt look like it based on the
latest action by Congress on H-1B visas. Out-of-work IT people making
two-thirds less just dont buy new cars any more.
There is a growing fallacy hyped by some reporters that some people think
U.S. IT people are "lacking" or unskilled as compared to others. In the
comments section of the InfoWorld article, someone makes the point that
foreign workers are somehow better skilled. This is the attitude some
people are taking as an air of superiority to IT people here. The plain
truth is that companies are just bringing in cheap labor to lower costs.
This was reported on ePrairie back in 2002 and 2003. Even though job
erosion in the IT area has been around even before Sept. 11, 2001, it
really soared after with H-1Bs. Most did not see it or did not report on
it.
"Cheaper labor" is the key phrase rather than "superior IT skills". Some
companies are purposely not hiring Americans. Ask anyone out there who has
sent in hundreds of resumes. Also look at the database where many of these
companies have requested (and have been granted) H-1B status jobs.
Americans must be superior in many respects to their foreign counterparts
because companies keep telling them they are "overqualified". How can the
lack of skill sets be the reason why foreign workers are being hired? The
real reason is that companies would rather pay $40,000 to $50,000 rather
than $90,000 to $100,000. This was covered in several editorials:
The Silent Technology Tsunami: Carly Fiorina, Major Mergers (2/16/05)
Are Guest Worker Programs Causing Backlash Amid IT Downsizing? (1/4/06)
H-1B Program: Some Companies Addicted, Some Actually Overdosing (1/25/06)
Are Economic Indices Accurate
Low unemployment? Maybe. High underemployment? Definitely. This seems to be
the consensus by those who are still looking for that replacement job after
they left Lucent, Motorola, Tellabs and others in the last five years. I
have received comments from others who feel its time to do something as
things are not getting better. One worker opposing the H-1B program sent in
this insight:
Were up against a very formidable foe. The foe is an alliance between
big business and the federal government. The purposes of the alliance are
to ensure that incumbent politicians are reelected and to save a great deal
of money in labor costs for big business.
The mechanism that delivers the alliances aims is for big business to
save hundreds of billions of dollars per year in labor costs by opening
U.S. borders to cheaper labor from abroad and for them to pass about 1
percent of the savings to the reelection campaigns of politicians as a
kickback.
I know from personal experience that its a shock to realize the federal
government is as corrupt as this. The sad fact is that it is.
If IT workers had their heads screwed on properly, they would form a
pressure group and commit 1 percent of their incomes to it. If they were to
do this, they would have the most powerful lobby in Washington and could
immediately squelch the attack on their incomes. While the employers of IT
workers are well-organized for self-advantage, the sad fact is that IT
workers have proved firmly resistant to the same.
This lack of Congressional action and collusion seems very plausible.
Looking the other way is very evident in many industries (not just IT).
They say many jobs are being taken over by workers using phony social
security cards.
A carpet installer pointed out to me that theres no rush to stop all
these phony social security numbers being used in many other industries.
Its a source of revenue at the end of the year to the government as
those using phony social security cards dont file for refunds. Thats
an interesting observation.
Wake Up, Congress!
In light of the Senate working on immigration reform, you would think
reforming the H-1B visa issue for IT workers would be a top priority.
Unfortunately, it isnt. While there are issues about border security as
well as total amnesty for the estimated 11 million illegal aliens,
reforming or eliminating guest worker programs is not on the agenda.
Foreign workers taking jobs - whether they are legal or illegal - have put
a negative spin on the economy no matter what the figures say.
More people are getting more vocal about foreign worker programs being very
anti-American. Is this a call to arms by some? We see riots in France about
job reform. Are we at the edge of tolerance for Congressional indifference
in this country? Does anyone else see the economy from this view? If you
dont, youre not seeing the whole picture and you better wake up.
Carlinism: Looking the other way does not give you an insight on whats
really happening.
7. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1468230.cms
First hurdle is over for H-1B hopefuls
URMI A GOSWAMI
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 2006 12:00:08 AM]
NEW DELHI: For H-1B visa hopefuls, the first hurdles been crossed. The
US Senate Judiciary Committee has approved an immigration bill by a 12-6
vote.
But the good news doesnt end here. It seems that the bill, approved by
the judiciary committee, bears a close resemblance to the Secure America
and Orderly Immigration Act sponsored by senators Edward Kennedy and John
McCain.
The McCain-Kennedy Bill makes the issue of an annual cap for H-IB visas the
crux, as it proposes a new category of visas for all temporary workers,
skilled and unskilled.
The McCain-Kennedy Bill allows for far more skilled immigrants than the
H-1B programme does. Immigration experts say this is the largest
guest-worker bill in history.
The first year, it will allow about 400,000 guest workers to get visas and
the numbers will increase each year.
Further, the bill proposes that if the number of visas allocated for that
fiscal year is used up within the first quarter of the year, then an
additional 20% of visas will be allocated immediately for the rest of the
year.
The number of temporary worker visas available for the year would increase
by 20% every year. The figure to fix allocations would be that on the
original quota for the previous fiscal year.
So, if the first year allows for 400,000 temporary workers, then the next
year would have a quota of 480,000 visas and the year after would have
576,000.
Lawmakers expect that given the broad support for the McCain-Kennedy bill,
the proposed bill will be passed quickly and the Senate may vote on it this
week.
However, getting the proposal past the US House of Representatives may not
be so easy. The representatives have been seen to be tough on immigration
issues.
8. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/14212114.htm
Posted on Wed, Mar. 29, 2006
Proposed expansion of H-1B visas is long overdue
Mercury News Editorial
The increase in the number of visas for skilled tech workers, part of a
broader immigration bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, is an
important step to boost America's and Silicon Valley's competitiveness.
The visas, known as H-1B, have been capped at 65,000 annually. Yet the
demand for engineers, programmers and other workers with specialized skills
is such that in the past two years all the available visas were taken on
the first day of the fiscal year.
That has left tech companies throughout the valley and beyond unable to
fill key positions here -- increasing the likelihood of more jobs moving
overseas. The 50,000 additional visas approved by the committee would go a
long way toward helping companies meet their workforce needs locally.
Yet the Senate should do more to shed light on the H-1B visa program.
Various reports have raised suspicions that some companies abuse the
program by bringing in foreigners with run-of-the-mill skills at sub-par
wages, displacing deserving American workers. That's not what the program
was intended for. By requiring the government to track and report wages,
educational background, job categories and other data about H-1B visa
recipients, Congress could expose the alleged abuse -- or put the
suspicions to rest.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter should also be commended for
proposing to create a new kind of visa for students pursuing master's or
doctoral degrees in science, math or engineering at U.S. universities.
These students, whose education is often subsidized by American taxpayers,
represent the best and brightest from around the world. The new F-4 visas
would put them on the path to U.S. citizenship, increasing the chances that
they would remain here rather than pursue opportunities in their home
countries.
Talented immigrants had a hand in founding Intel, Sun Microsystems, Yahoo,
Google, eBay and other valley icons. These provisions would keep America's
door open for the world's best innovators and entrepreneurs. As
negotiations on the overall immigration bill move forward, senators of both
parties should rally behind them and help the country retain its global
economic and technological leadership.
9. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1468378.cms
US law to hike H1B visas for Indians
Chidanand Rajghatta
[ Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:00:22 amTIMES INTERNET NETWORK ]
WASHINGTON: The white collar Indians American dream is poised to get a
boost following the passage in the US Senate Judiciary Committee of an
immigration bills that hikes the H1-B visa quota from the current 65,000 to
115,000 annually.
The H1-B hike is part of the omnibus immigration reform bill aimed at
legalising some 11 million illegal aliens in the United States and allowing
400,000 guest workers into the country, subject to conditions.
The Bill passed 12-6 in the Senate Judiciary Committee - helped by a split
among Republicans - and will now go before the full Senate for discussion
this week, before it is voted again if it is to become law. If it does
become law, the H1-B hike wll come as a big boon to tech companies both in
the United States and in India, which have been chafing at the 65,000
limit.
The H1-B is a essentially a guest worker visa for highskilled professionals
such as computer programmers and companies from both countries use it to
bring in white collar professionals to meet shortages in the United States.
Often in the past Indian workers who have come to the US on H1-B have
stayed back to get Green cards and become citizens, although lately there
appears to bea two-way traffic.
10. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14172371
Senate panel vote for increase in H-1B visa
Wednesday, 29 March , 2006, 10:34
Washington: The Senate Judiciary Committee of the United States has voted
to significantly increase the number of H-1B visas for highly skilled
foreign workers as part of a controversial immigration Bill that faces a
tough fight in the Congress before it becomes law.
This measure to double the number of temporary visas to H-1B
skilled-workers to 115,000 -- with an option of raising the cap 20 per cent
more each year - was buried in the Senate's giant 300-page Immigration Bill
that got approved 12-6 on Tuesday.
The Bill, once adopted by the Senate and the Congress, would open the
country's doors to highly skilled immigrants for science, mathematics,
technology and engineering jobs from India, China and other nations.
The H1-B visa provisions were incorporated into the immigration legislation
at the insistence of Silicon Valley tech companies and enjoys significant
bipartisan support amid concerns that the United States might lose its edge
in technology.
Silicon Valley high-tech companies are strongly backing the proposed
increase in H-1B visas, which currently are capped at 65,000 a year,
according to the California-based Mercury News.
Various exemptions in the programme for certain types of jobs, such as
those with non-profit organisations, would mean that around 220,000
foreigners a year now actually receive the six-year visas.
The provision for highly skilled workers was introduced after high-profile
studies warned that the United States was not producing enough mathematics
and science students and was in danger of losing its global edge in
innovation to India and China.
The proposal on H-1B visas, as approved by the committee, would increase
the annual cap of H-1B visas from 65,000 to 115,000 beginning in 2007 while
keeping all those existing exemptions. It effectively would boost the
number of H-1B visas to nearly 300,000 a year.
11. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060329.wxcoparis29/BNStory/specialComment/home
Revolutionize France's labour laws
TIMOTHY SMITH
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
The streets are alive with the sound of solidarity. Hundreds of thousands
of people have marched in Paris alone to protest French Prime Minister
Dominique de Villepin's "CPE" law (Contrat premihre embauche, or First
Job Contract). The law is a response to the riots of last November, when
France's unemployed youth expressed their frustration with an economic
model that has excluded them for a quarter century. If implemented, the CPE
will allow employers to hire and fire, at will, those under the age of 26,
during the first two years of employment. The law is designed to make job
creation (and destruction) an easier affair. It is a colossal tactical
error.
French youth can be forgiven for asking why they alone are expected to
shoulder the burden of reform. Why, after 25 years of high unemployment,
blocked career paths and falling wages, they should be subjected to even
more economic insecurity. If the state subsidizes generous early retirement
and cocoons the elderly from insecurity, why can't it do the same for
youth?
If the Prime Minister had courage equal to his desire to assume the
presidential throne next year, he would begin a national dialogue asking
everyone to tighten their belts. But he dares not rock the boat and lose
votes. Instead, Mr. de Villepin failed to consult the key players in this
drama, charging ahead without preparing the ideological battleground.
During the past decade, Mr. de Villepin's mentor, President Jacques Chirac,
gave more than one hundred anti-American, anti-globalization speeches, so
the public is somewhat perplexed when the dauphin seems bent on slipping a
slice of U.S. political economy through the back door. The CPE is seen as
heralding the end of the good old days of life-long job security, and the
advent of a more "American" labour market, with its easy hiring and firing.
In fact, easy hiring and firing was one of the hallmarks of France during
the 1950s and 1960s, at least in the private sector, when France had faith
in the future and when the economy boomed.
The Prime Minister understands this, but he has erred in legislating labour
flexibility in small measures. In the name of equality, he must free up the
entire labour force. And in the name of efficiency, he must downsize the
Code du Travail, a document that wraps French firms in miles and miles of
red tape, making France, along with Italy, the least-attractive place in
the developed world for the creation and growth of companies.
The parents of today's protesters needed no special laws to find jobs. Full
employment took care of that. Today, if Canadian and British and American
25-year-olds are capable of securing their careers themselves, why can't
their French counterparts? Because full employment comes with a price, and
today's comfortably protected older French workers refuse to pay it: labour
market flexibility. History records no capitalist nation -- not one -- with
complex labour laws aimed at protecting existing jobs that also maintained
full employment for a decade. The Swedes and Danes understand this; most
French people do not.
A law targeted at helping young workers will surely end by stigmatizing
them. Should a 25-year-old be treated as a second-class citizen, worthy of
"special" treatment, like a female worker in the 1890s? If the CPE goes
forward next month, companies will hire workers, only to fire them just
before the two-year trial period ends -- just as they currently chew up and
spit out tens of thousands of poorly paid interns every year. The best way
to "humanize" the economy is to run it at full steam. Full employment puts
bargaining power in the hands of workers. It gives them exit options.
French youth need full employment, not another law passed in their name.
But the types of policies required to bring about full employment are
deemed "unsolidaristic" so they are not introduced. A quarter-century of
high unemployment has turned France into a nation of suspicious minds.
Before the French accept the idea of freer labour markets, they must be
reassured the state will catch their fall, should they lose their job. But
France's adult-education sector is small and job-retraining centres are
scarce (there are many more in Stockholm than in Paris, even though Paris
has 10 times the population). Small wonder, then, that most French people
refuse to accept that a bit more job insecurity will lead to more job
creation. A veil of nationalistic ideology ensures the public's ignorance
of the merits of other social models. Mr. de Villepin's opponents discredit
him by associating him with the Thatcherite path, but they never admit
Scandinavia loosened its labour laws during the 1990s without increasing
inequality substantially.
For 20 years, the comfortable French middle class has said: Yes, we want
reform, but not this reform, and only as long as someone else pays for it,
and provided that it does not resemble "Anglo-Saxon" reforms. If the CPE
goes forward, it will help to reduce youth unemployment. But the government
will reap no political reward for a reform it has failed to justify in the
intellectual sense. France needs a centrist politician willing to make
peace with capitalism and defend the best components of the welfare state.
Mr. de Villepin must stand his ground. The CPE law is flawed, but the way
to correct this is through democratic, parliamentary means. All future
reform depends on his defence of democracy against the demagogues. Let Mr.
de Villepin be defeated -- if he must be defeated -- with the ballot box,
not with the barricade.
Should foreigners care? Yes. If France continues on its current course, the
sky will not fall, but the protectionist tide will rise. The European
project may come crashing down. If this happens, France will wash away the
gains from trade it has made over the past few decades. France, Europe, and
the entire world will be a poorer place.
Timothy B. Smith, who teaches history at Queen's University, is author of
France in Crisis, published as La France injuste in France.
www.ZaZona.com
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Subscribe, Unsubscribe or to view the Archive go to:
http://www.zazona.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm
Back to archives