General > General Technical Chat
Engineering Immigration Isn't Working?
armandine2:
a couple of fairly obvious thoughts:
It is a huge own goal for a country to prevent highly able overseas professionals in shortage occupations to apply for their job's vacancies.
Another own goal, is/was the failure of the business community to progress (get) wannabe professionals of their own country to start their professional careers in occupations where they had significant aptitude/qualifications.
Rick Law:
--- Quote from: kendricks on April 09, 2024, 03:52:04 pm ---but the U.S. has five engineers on one visa.
--- End quote ---
There are too many ways to cheat these days.
Even if we accept the idea that there is not enough local qualified engineer, H1B is not the solution. It merely covers the symptom and does solve the issue -- it does not create more local engineers. If it is a temporary burst, I can see that. But to use H1B'ers for decades, that doesn't solve the problem. It increases the problem by reducing opportunities for local engineers.
If the reason for hiring H1B'er is cost to to employer, and I believe it is. My opinion therefore is "cost is the fix." An H1B tax/fee for employer (not employee) may solve the problem: 60% to 100% of total compensation including benefits. The money will be use domestically for scholarships for the fields where H1B is hired. Starts at 60%, each year, it goes up 20% till it reach 100%. In the USA, 50% is common for overtime pay, so at 60% H1B'er tax/fee, even asking current staff to work overtime would be less costly to the employer. Employer can have as many H1B'ers as they need, it just costs them more than hiring locals. This solution should actually be familiar to people in the film industry today. In some countries, union rules makes bringing in a foreign camera operator and other support staff way more costly than hiring locals.
With the H1B tax/fee going into scholarship funds for domestic students, the more the need, the more the scholarship funds. Presumably, more domestic student would go into those fields if scholarship funding is more available. So that will solve or reduce the availability problem as well.
For someone who is truly a catch, people like Schrödinger, Einstein, Christiaan Barnard... Many institutions would be happy to taking them paying 2x their salary just to get them on their staff. For someone who is a average C coder, 100% employer tax will stop it stone cold.
I pick the name "Christiaan Barnard" for a reason. He was the first to do a heart transplant (Cape Town, Dec 3, 1967). A friend of mine who works as an immigration lawyer once told me, H1 visa was designed to with people like Christiaan Barnard in mind. Not sure if my friend (RIP) was just picking a name or he knows for sure, but each time I trained an H1B'er, be it my replacement or replacement for someone on my staff. I am fairly confident this H1B'er is no Christiaan Barnard.
tooki:
--- Quote from: Rick Law on September 07, 2022, 06:37:06 pm ---I suspect BS also. In the USA, employers are always saying "too many job opening, not enough applicants..." yet new local college graduates in the exact same field couldn't get a job. With whatever "push" industries use to drive the politicians, the gate opens wider and wider. That had gone on for years.
--- End quote ---
The problem is, as I see it, the way that many companies have deflated the experience levels so they can pay less. That is, they categorize as “entry level” a job whose requirements are in no way entry-level. (IMHO, 3-5 years experience and a master’s diploma is in no way “entry level”.) This creates a gulf between true job entrants and the jobs themselves. The companies that do try to bridge the gap do so with unpaid internships, which many people simply cannot afford to do.
IMHO this is all just companies shirking their responsibility to create the experienced workers they actually need.
In much of Europe, one way this problem is solved by formalized apprenticeship systems. But this requires buy-in from industry, in that they recognize their responsibility in creating their “new blood”. They accept that this costs money, but benefits their industry in the long run. The flip side is that they get to “mold” the apprentices a bit, in that they’re gaining experience in what that company does.
(I have experience with both approaches: I have a university education from a very good university in USA, and did an apprenticeship in Switzerland.)
And let’s not forget another problem with employers and their inability to find applicants: brain-dead HR staff and software. HR people who don’t properly understand the jobs they’re processing applicants for use software to manage incoming applications, using keyword filtering to eliminate “unqualified” applicants who, in actuality, would be excellent candidates if given the chance. That and truly stupid crap like wanting “experienced” programmers for a specific technology, and then define “experienced” as some minimum number of years —on a technology or product that hasn’t existed that long. (I recently read about this happening to someone, rejected for not having sufficient experience with some open source program. A program he wrote. |O )
temperance:
Maybe Faringdon can move to Australia. Some immediate advantages:
-The weather is better.
-Beaches filled with cute ladies in red swimming costumes with window cleaning lips. That's if you're into that or happen to have a fish tank.
-You don't have to sip tea all day long to blend in. No more waiting in front of the bathroom where most difficult engineering discussions take place.
-Border control is very stringent so no more CE SMPS to look after. Fake components are non existent. If it blows up, take mirror and talk to yourself because it must be your own fault.
-If you're tired of fixing the SMPS's you can mine some gold. It is so abundant you only need a shovel and a strong accent.
At least, that's what they show us on TV in Europe.
EDit: I forgot to mention that all those engineers, doctors, dentists and shoe sole repairers went to the EU. But we don't need doctors, engineers,...
CatalinaWOW:
--- Quote from: Rick Law on April 09, 2024, 07:17:14 pm ---
--- Quote from: kendricks on April 09, 2024, 03:52:04 pm ---but the U.S. has five engineers on one visa.
--- End quote ---
There are too many ways to cheat these days.
Even if we accept the idea that there is not enough local qualified engineer, H1B is not the solution. It merely covers the symptom and does solve the issue -- it does not create more local engineers. If it is a temporary burst, I can see that. But to use H1B'ers for decades, that doesn't solve the problem. It increases the problem by reducing opportunities for local engineers.
If the reason for hiring H1B'er is cost to to employer, and I believe it is. My opinion therefore is "cost is the fix." An H1B tax/fee for employer (not employee) may solve the problem: 60% to 100% of total compensation including benefits. The money will be use domestically for scholarships for the fields where H1B is hired. Starts at 60%, each year, it goes up 20% till it reach 100%. In the USA, 50% is common for overtime pay, so at 60% H1B'er tax/fee, even asking current staff to work overtime would be less costly to the employer. Employer can have as many H1B'ers as they need, it just costs them more than hiring locals. This solution should actually be familiar to people in the film industry today. In some countries, union rules makes bringing in a foreign camera operator and other support staff way more costly than hiring locals.
With the H1B tax/fee going into scholarship funds for domestic students, the more the need, the more the scholarship funds. Presumably, more domestic student would go into those fields if scholarship funding is more available. So that will solve or reduce the availability problem as well.
For someone who is truly a catch, people like Schrödinger, Einstein, Christiaan Barnard... Many institutions would be happy to taking them paying 2x their salary just to get them on their staff. For someone who is a average C coder, 100% employer tax will stop it stone cold.
I pick the name "Christiaan Barnard" for a reason. He was the first to do a heart transplant (Cape Town, Dec 3, 1967). A friend of mine who works as an immigration lawyer once told me, H1 visa was designed to with people like Christiaan Barnard in mind. Not sure if my friend (RIP) was just picking a name or he knows for sure, but each time I trained an H1B'er, be it my replacement or replacement for someone on my staff. I am fairly confident this H1B'er is no Christiaan Barnard.
--- End quote ---
The overall idea makes sense. But it you believe that the way the system works now has limited the supply of domestic engineers, which is at least partly true in my opinion your solution will cause two things - a painful transition and export of jobs.
Maybe modify it with a graduated kick in, roughly equal to the pipeline delay for domestic talent. Roughly four to five years. Start the tax at 15% and grow 15% each year until it reaches your starting point and go from there.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version