Rense.com

 
Companies Find More Ways
To Bring In Foreign Workers
From Sharon
2-26-4
 
Hi Jeff,
 
I thought your readers - especially the unemployed ones - would find this interesting.
 
Last year Congress reduced the number of H-1B visas - typically used by tech workers, often from India - that would be issued annually from 195,000 to 65,000. That cap was reached less than five months into the fiscal year.
 
Not well publicized has been the fact that petitions for CURRENT H-1B workers do not apply towards the cap.
 
As the first story notes, "these would include the extension of H-1B visas, which is an additional three years to the initial three years for which a visa is issued... and applications that would allow for current H-1B workers to work concurrently in a second H-1B position."
 
In addition, "petitions for new H-1B employment are not subject to the annual cap if the alien will be employed at an institution of higher education or a related or affiliated nonprofit entity, or at a non-profit research organisation or a governmental research organisation."
 
Companies are also finding ways around the H-1B cap... one way is through use of the L-1 visa. As the second story notes, use of the L-1 is "a win-win situation for both the company and the [foreign] professional, because the L-1, unlike the H1-B, is not subject to any kind of cap. Furthermore, "there is no cap on the overall number, which means a company can bring in as many L-1 pros as it likes, even in groups. There are no stipulations such as paying market salaries or ensuring that an American citizen couldn't have done the job."
 
The last two stories talk about current Congressional hearings into whether limits should be placed on L-1 visas. Even if L-1 limits WERE enacted, it wouldn't necessarily have an impact on the number of foreign tech workers being brought in. That's because Bush's proposed new 'temporary' worker program would not only be applicable to the unskilled masses, but also, according to Margaret Spellings, Bush's assistant for domestic policy, "could extend to highly skilled positions as well" including "programmers or other tech professionals."
 
Just more bad news for the unemployed American.
 
 
No New H-1B Visas Before October
By Aziz Haniffa
rediff.com
2-26-4
 
WASHINGTON -- The Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services has said that the congressionally mandated cap of 65,000 H-1B visas has been reached less than five months into Fiscal Year 2004 (which began October 1,2003) and hence no more applications would be accepted.
 
The USCIS, which is now a division of the Department of Homeland Security after Congress closed down the erstwhile Immigration and Naturalization Service, said certain procedures for the remainder of FY 2004 had been implemented.
 
All first-time employment petitions received by February 17 will now be processed while those received after this date would be returned along with the filing fee.
 
It said petitioners could re-submit their papers when the H-1B visas become available for FY 2005,which begins on October 1, 2004, and April 1, 2004, is the earliest date at which such applications could be filed.
 
The USCIS said petitions for current H-1B workers do not count towards the congressionally mandated cap and accordingly, these applications would continue to be processed.
 
These would include the extension of H-1B visas, which is an additional three years to the initial three years for which a visa is issued; a change in terms of employment for the current H-1B visa holders; applications that would allow for current H-1B workers to change employers; and applications that would allow for current H-1B workers to work concurrently in a second H-1B position.
 
The USCIS also noted that "petitions for new H-1B employment are not subject to the annual cap if the alien will be employed at an institution of higher education or a related or affiliated nonprofit entity, or at a non-profit research organisation or a governmental research organisation."
 
India has traditionally provided the bulk of H-1B workers -- over 40 per cent, primarily in the information technology sector -- but in recent years with the slump in the US economy and with jobs being outsourced, the program has become controversial with many lawmakers, both Republican and Democrat, calling for its elimination.
 
In 2000, when demand was at its height and the information technology sector was experiencing a boom, Congress responding to the lobbying of the high-tech industry increased the cap from 65,000 to 195,000. But that increase expired on September 30, 2003 and the cap was reverted to 65,000.
 
Since the economy was in the doldrums, and the Internet bubble had burst, the high-tech industry, which was the driving force behind the increase in H-1B visas was lukewarm in its efforts to retain the increased cap and the few lobbying efforts fell by the wayside as the Congressional environment was not conducive to maintaining the 195,000 limit.
 
Some groups like the American Immigration Lawyers Association argued that the cap be at least made 115,000, arguing that H-1B workers, who not only constitute IT workers but nurses and other highly skilled professionals are vital to keep the US economy going, but Congress was in no mood to acquiesce to their pleas.
 
The President-elect of the AILA, Paul Zulkie is bemoaning that the cap has already being reached and no more new applications are likely to be approved till October. He warned that the immediate impact would mean that "projects are put on hold, capital expenditures are deferred and lives are thrown into chaos."
 
Copyright © 2003 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/feb/18visa.htm
 
 
Companies May Switch To L-1 When H1-B Is Capped
Times News Network - India
2-26-4

Aurobindo Dasgupta is hiding his optimism under a cloak of nonchalance, but he knows he has a great chance of bagging a hot, hot post in the US with the financial services company he works for.
 
His employers are considering picking him ahead of American competitors, simply on merit, for a job that would normally be held by someone who's spent several years working in the US. The job involves planning for the US market, after all. But Dasgupta is the favourite for the post because he seems to be the best person for the job out of his globe-spanning employers' huge workforce.
 
If he gets the post, though, Dasgupta will not be working on a H1-B visa. Instead, his company will simply take him over on an L-1 visa. From Dasgupta's perspective, it makes no difference: he'll be earning what his company thinks he's worth, not a figure at a huge discount that an American in the same position would get.
 
That's a win-win situation for both the company and the professional, because the L-1, unlike the H1-B, is not subject to any kind of cap. As employment consultants point out, that means there is no competiton for the limited number of permits allowed under the H1-B.
 
Indeed, with only 21,500 of the 65,000 H1-B visas allotted for October 2003-November 2004 still up for grabs [as of January 30], companies looking for overseas talents, especially from countries like India, are expected to resort to the L-1 instead. For those who came in late, the L-1 visa is used for intra-company transfers: typically, a Wipro or an Accenture will hire you in India and then post you temporarily in the US, using the L-1 visa.
 
Right now, tech companies in the US are rather worried about the possibility of not being able to bring in Indian programmers if the H1-B quota runs out. Projects are expected to be stalled mid-way once the cap is reached, which is now likely to be as early as April. That means no company will be able to hire fresh global talent on the H1-B for as much as six months between April and October this year.
 
Can their projects afford to be put into cold-storage? Especially since, in an election year, the last thing that the Bush Administration is likely to do is to lift the H1-B quota back from 65,000 to anywhere near the 195,000 level at which it stood in the past two years.
 
Ironically, it was US companies' inability to hire that many people on H1-Bs over the past two years ñ thanks to the tech downturn ñ that led to the curtailing of the quota in the first place. In 2003, only 78,000 H-1B visas were issued against the cap, and in 2002 only 79,000 were, according to government figures. But now, just as companies are ready to hire, the rules won't allow them to bring more people over on H1-Bs.
 
Indeed, one form of hiring that is likely to seem less attractive to Indians as a result is campus-hiring in April. As companies hit US B-Schools and technical colleges for fresh recruits, theyíll have to pass over Indians since the H1-B quota will likely have been exhausted by then.
 
Enter the L1. The advantages for employers are obvious: there is no cap on the overall number, which means a company can bring in as many L-1 pros as it likes, even in groups. There are no stipulations such as paying market salaries or ensuring that an American citizen couldn't have done the job. Best of all, clearance takes as much as six to eight weeks less than for the H1-B.
 
All that a company has to do is to hire you in India, either directly or through a subsidiary, affiliate or parent company, and transfer you to the US. The only pre-condition: you must have worked for at least one year out of the three years prior to getting the visa with the company that's sending you or taking you over. In other words, you needn't even be employed by the company at the time ñ you could be rejoining after a gap of up to two years. Don't expect salary parity with people in the US, however, unless it's an honourable company ñ and there are many of them ñ that's hiring you.
 
However, for all its advantages, the L-1 has not been used as widely as the H1-B, which is probably the reason it hasn't attracted a cap yet. In 2001, for instance, the 59,384 L-1 visas issued were way short of the 161,643 H1-Bs. In 2002, the corresponding figures were 57,721 and 118,352. Last year, 54,817 L-1 pros started work in the US, compared to 100,969 H1-Bs. Like the H1-B, Indian pros are the biggest L-1 species, too, receiving a quarter of the visas issued in 2002.
 
But all that could change now. The most interesting aspect of the L-1 visa is the nuance that differentiates it from the H1-B. On the face of it, the two are similar, but actually, besides the regulatory caps, the spirit behind the application is quite different. The H1-B is for professionally qualified people who fill jobs for which no American candidate can be found: thus, in theory it is meant to bridge the gap between demand for and supply of human resources. It's also renewable.
 
The L-1 actually comes in two categories: the L-1A is for managers and executives who needn't have any special higher educational qualifications. It's applicable for five years and cannot be renewed. The L-1B is for other professionals who are considered to have an intricate understanding of the processes and technologies used by the company hiring them. This version runs for seven years.
 
For both these sub-categories, the idea is that companies operating in the US ñ whether American or foreign ñ can bring over people who can transfer knowledge from their parents' affiliates' or subsidiaries' operations, and can add value to American operations. These are not meant to be jobs for which Americans could have been hired ñ they are meant to utilise the talents of specific individuals. And the champions of the L-1 argue that the visa is key to improving the competitiveness of American as well as foreign companies doing business in the US.
 
Of course, whether employees really look at the L-1 that way is another matter altogether. It's true that it would be easy for companies to simply substitute the H1-B with the L-1 when getting Indians to work in the US. But although those protesting against the so-called loss of American jobs to Indians and others have included the L-1 in their targets, this 34-year-old visa has, on the whole, escaped censure in a way the H1-B hasn't.
 
If you want a US assignment, therefore, better start reading the fine print of the requirements for a L-1.
 
- This story was originally published January 30, 2004.
 
Copyright © 2004 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
http://infotech.indiatimes.com/articleshow/454497.cms
 
 
After H-1B, US Politicians Gun For L-1 visa
Economic Times - India
2-26-4
 
You thought you could go to the US on a L-1 visa even if the H-1B quota is over? Well, the truth is, the L-1 programme could soon find itself shackled even before the H-1B runs out.
 
US politicians, wary of the public resentment against lower paid foreign workers taking away jobs, are now taking up cudgels on their behalf against L-1 visas.
 
[Recently], several US technology professionals who have lost their jobs to Indian IT pros, went before a congressional panel to argue their case. Almost all those appeared before the panel had one complaint - that companies were abusing the H-1B and L-1 programmes, according to reports in technology Website Zdnet.com.
 
L-1 visas allow companies to temporarily bring in employees from other countries for managerial or executive work, or for work that entails specialised knowledge.
 
The L-1 programme has a five-year limit on employees with specialised skills staying in the US and a seven-year limit on executives. But unlike its cousin, the H-1B visa programme, Congress has not limited the number of L-1 visas granted each year. There is also no required pay rate for the L-1.
 
Estimates of L-1 visas issued till date vary. According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform the number of L-1s has grown from just over 75,000 in 1992 to more than 328,000 in 2001.
 
The ITAA's estimates are lower; the organisation estimates about 121,000 new L-1 visa holders entered the US in 2001.
 
According to Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., the number of L-1 visas issued has tripled during the past 20 years, to about 113,000 in 2002.
 
What is clear, however, is that US and Indian companies with US operations are relying heavily on the L-1.
 
All that could change soon. The congressional hearing raises a notch higher the intensity of the fight to curtail the controversial visa programmes
 
According to Hyde, a State Department memo from 1996 presents documentation indicating that, at that time, "ninety per cent of the L petitions investigated by the American Consulate in Guangzhou proved to be fraudulent."
 
Sona Shah, a US citizen and computer programmer, told the panel that a subsidiary of computer services company Automatic Data Processing had abused the L-1 and other visas. The firm had employed foreign guest workers and denied assignments or training to US employees like her. Shah said the US professionals were kept around temporarily to obscure the use of cheap foreign labour.
 
"Our skills (and) morale deteriorated from this lack of training and hands-on work," Shah said. "Periodically, batches of us American workers, hired as window dressing, were terminated."
 
Shah and her fiance, Kai Barrett, who worked for ADP subsidiary Wilco Systems as an H-1B visa holder, are suing the company.
 
Some professionals who deposed before the panel also fumed about how companies make staff train foreign workers who are set to replace them. Patricia Fluno, an ex-employee of a Siemens unit in Florida, said: "This was the most humiliating experience of my life." She lost her job to a lower-paid L-1 employee from Tata Consultancy Services, says Zdnet.com.
 
US labour groups also accuse Indian firms of using the visa programme to spirit away knowledge from the United States.
 
Michael Gildea, executive director of the department for professional employees of US labour organisation AFL-CIO, said: "Once the team of temporary workers has the knowledge and technical skills -- sometimes after being trained by US workers -- as much of the work that is technically feasible to offshore is then carted back to India."
 
Gildea added that Infosys, TCS and Wipro were acting as "bodyshops", bringing in foreign workers through the L-1 system and then subcontracting them out to other businesses.
 
Indian IT companies are among the biggest applicants for H-1B visas and are heavy users of L-1 visas. So any legal restrictions placed on the programmes would hit the Indian techie the hardest.
 
The lone defender of the L-1 programme at the hearing was Harris Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA). He told the lawmakers that changes to L-1 rules would trigger a trade war that would hurt US IT companies, which export more IT products than are imported into the US.
 
Miller said the programme helped US IT companies fill critical jobs, by bringing in specialists. This results in more jobs for US workers, he said.
 
He also called for a better definition of the "specialised knowledge" needed by L-1 applicants, because some companies may have too broadly defined the category. An applicant is supposed to have specialised knowledge of the company's products, service, research, equipment, or other functions or advanced knowledge of the company's processes and procedures.
 
"The overall programme is not broken and doesn't need to be fixed," Miller said.
 
He also argued that tampering with the L-1 programme could reduce the amount of foreign direct investment made in the United States.
 
Whatever the outcome of the hearing, already US lawmakers have proposed several bills that aim to reform the visa programmes.
 
The proposed bills would end the practice of allowing L-1 visa holders to be subcontracted by one employer to another, require L-1 workers to be paid the prevailing wage, and require all companies that hire H-1B employees to comply with lay-off protections and recruitment requirements. The latter measures were till now reserved for firms relying heavily on H1-Bs.
 
Adding to all the resentment among US workers is President Bush's call for a new temporary worker programme, which could cover skilled workers too.
 
The programme, Bush said, would "match willing foreign workers with willing US employers when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs." While announcing the plan Bush seemed to focus on less-skilled workers employed in the United States. However, Margaret Spellings, Bush's assistant for domestic policy, indicated later that the programme could extend to highly skilled positions as well. She said the programme will be "non-sector specific" and indicated that programmers or other tech professionals could be covered by the programme.
 
More reason why it may not ever take off. Worse still, the Bush programme could actually fuel the backlash against H-1B and L-1 workers.
 
- This story was originally published February 5, 2004.
 
© Bennett, Coleman and Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-477449,prtpage-1.cm s
 
 
US Lobby Backs L1 Visas
By Aziz Haniffa
rediff.com
2-26-4
 
WASHINGTON -- A pro-outsourcing lobbying group has come together to counter the flood of anti-BPO testimony before the House International Relations Committee.
 
The group, comprising the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council on International Personnel told the HIRC, headed by Congressman Henry Hyde (Illinois-Republican) that tampering with the L1 visa program could be counter-productive to US interests.
 
In recent hearings before the HIRC, witnesses had alleged that Indian infotech companies were operating like body shops, and using this visa category to displace American workers with lower paid Indian workers.
 
The group told the HIRC it shared these concerns, but pointed out that to call for a ban on the L1 visa, which was created in 1970 to enable US companies with international operations to transfer senior executives and employees with specialized knowledge, would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 
'Efforts to superimpose quotas, minimum wages and other restrictions on the L1 visa misunderstand the fundamental nature of the visa and the role it plays in international companies and in our economy,' representatives of the coalition told the Hyde-led committee.
 
'Any changes could inadvertently hurt this country's ability to attract foreign direct investment and the jobs that go with investment," coalition spokesman Randel K Johnson, vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits of the USCC which represents over three million businesses, told the committee.
 
'Any limitations on this visa category could severely harm the ability of US companies to operate and expand in the domestic and international markets,' Johnson warned.
 
Adding its weight to the coalition's arguments, American Business for Legal Immigration, a coalition of associations and companies that backs legal, employment-driven immigration, asked the committee not to rush into any review of immigration policies that could hinder the ability of American companies to compete in the global economy.
 
ABLI chair and vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers' Human Resources Policy Sandy Boyd said, 'The expertise shared and experiences gained (through the L1 visa program) are integral to developing talent, growing markets and generally enhancing the international competitiveness of the US companies, that ultimately create jobs for Americans.'
 
It would be unfair, Boyd said, to undermine the program simply because a few companies have misused it.
 
Copyright © 2003 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
http://us.rediff.com/money/2004/feb/18visa2.htm
 
Disclaimer






MainPage
http://www.rense.com


This Site Served by TheHostPros