Okay since the H1B visa and country caps and the tech sector and India an Indians are all a hot topic right now, I would like to address this as someone who has worked behind the scenes in H1B consultancies in the tech sector and explain EXACTLY why I’m against removing country… https://t.co/yJhvKFER5T
— VISH BURRA 🏴☠️ (@VishBurra) December 25, 2024
Quote:
Okay since the H1B visa and country caps and the tech sector and India an Indians are all a hot topic right now, I would like to address this as someone who has worked behind the scenes in H1B consultancies in the tech sector and explain EXACTLY why I'm against removing country caps, against the H1B visa, and against the entire canard that we need to import more people from anywhere, let alone India, to do "jobs that the tech sector can't find Americans to do:
1) Sourcing Talent- Big companies like Google and Meta have the resources to go and actually pluck out the ACTUAL best talent from these countries, and it's not hard for them to attract those applicants either because they have the brand recognition. All the best want to work for the best. This isn't necessarily the problem. The problem is all the no name consultancies and mid size/small size consultancies. They can petition for H1B's too. How are they sourcing them? Well, they (usually run by Indians) just find a guy from India through their network…who's willing to work for them and come to America. That's it. They'll make sure they have some kind of Bachelors or Masters from some college out there and have the aptitude to learn and understand software that's it. They aren't actually "geniuses" or anything like that. They are just willing to work and can learn to "talk the talk" quickly.
2) Importation- once the prospective worker agrees, the consultancy petitions the American government (USCIS) on their behalf, saying they tried to recruit for the job (job doesn't exist) in America and couldn't find anyone, that's why they need to bring this guy. Key part of this is that the visa is tied to the employer, so if the employer drops the worker, worker has to go back. He can't just find another job. This is the indentured servitude model.
3) The Gambit- the consultancy makes sure the guy speak English, and that's really it. USCIS can't actually vet the workers on the knowledge they claim they have, especially a vast and sophisticated field like software. USCIS doesn't actually have a way to tell if someone is lying about their skills or not. All they have to do is convince the USCIS that they can speak English so they can come and immediately start working here.
4) The Actual Job- once they get the petition for visa approved and they come here, they find out (or already know) they actually don't have a job here yet. The consultancy now tries to find Corp to Corp contract gigs for the worker. That's if they actually know the tech and they're not faking. If they are faking their skills, another workflow is initiated.
5) Training Day (or months) - the fakers are trained for up to 3-4 months in a software that's marketable and fetch a good hourly contract rate. Basically a coding Bootcamp style program. They go from zero to superficial knowledge in the tech, just enough to pass an interview with a potential client.
6) Sell the fake - after training the fake for 3-4 months, the fake is provided with a fake resume claiming 7-8 years of experience. Why? Because that's how much experience is needed to demand a minimum of $50 per hour on a contract. Does it work? Duh. These workers trained for 3-4 months routinely fool interviewers looking for 7-8 years experience.
7) The Split- once the job and rate is secured, the consultancy bills at $50 per hour and pays the actual worker the minimum (about $27.50) an hour, and the consultancy pockets the difference. Imagine a 100 H1Bs on a roster doing this for you.
Does this sound like fraud? Well that's because it is, from beginning to end.
