American Techno-Politics

Going Political - Not Postal

2010-03-24T18:31:00.001-05:00

I think that in general we should oppose EMPLOYER sponsored immigration and/or work programs. I can't name an employer sponsored visa that hasn't resulted in fraud and abuse from employers - and a defacto indentured servitude relationship between employer and employee.

If you support the rights of labor and the notion that a worker, immigrant or citizen, should be able to leave their job without civil penalty, you should oppose the H-1b visa and evil cousins H-2 and L-1.

When an employer controls your right to live in this country, you will allow that employer to subject you to all forms of abuse out of fear. When an employer sponsors you for a green card, you won't negotiate for higher wages and better benefits because you know that losing your job would not only result in a loss of income, it would reset your perment residency process.

As a Democrat I find it disheartening that Senator Schumer would support a program that enables the exploitation of foreign workers, and harms American workers. He needs to get with the program and read what the AFL-CIO says about the H-1b visa. I can't imagine any self-respecting Democrat supporting an anti-labor and anti-immigrant agenda that embodies the H-1, H-2, and L-1 visa programs.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

HR 4321 – Analysis of the Gutierrez Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill and the impact on skilled workers

2009-12-31T13:02:00.001-05:00

I have had a long break from blogging, and wanted to take some of my spare time over the holidays to write about the immigration bill recently introduced. This 643 page bill tackles many immigration issues outside the purpose of this blog; as such I will focus solely on the provisions that impact the IT industry.

I reveal my support or lack of support further down. Please read my analysis so that you understand why I came to the conclusion that I did.

As I have stated for years, the H-1B and L-1B visas are disproportionately harmful towards the IT workforce. This is mainly because of a few factors:

First, the lion’s share of H-1B and L-1B visas go companies who sponsor IT workers. The concentration of workers in our profession impacts us more than any other. To make matters worse, in 2006 six of the top ten sponsoring companies of H-1B visas were Indian offshore outsourcing firms. Studies have shown that staff augmentation firms, or “body shops” are the worst offenders of the program and involved in high levels of fraud.
Second, many sponsors of H-1B workers are not paying market wages to their employees. Although the law requires “prevailing wages” to be paid, the legal definition of “prevailing wage” is well below market wage. As a result, a program originally created to fill labor shortages is now used to lower the cost of labor. The L-1B visa does not require any market test at all.
And the third (and last point) I will make is that H-1B workers aren’t able to participate in the free labor market. Because they are “sponsored” by a company, it is difficult for them to change jobs or find another sponsor. Workers seeking a permanent residency (a green-card) must reset their long and tedious process if they change jobs. This factor makes these workers exploitable, and less likely to bargain for market wages. Many are intimidated by their employers and fear being forced to leave the country. L-1B visa holders face a similar dilemma. This factor is why I often refer to H-1B and L-1B visa holders as “indentured servants” given their lack of mobility.

Although that is not a comprehensive list of problems with the H-1B and L-1B visas, it highlights some serious issues I have with the program. If you want more information on these programs and general concerns, a great resource is Wikipedia. Hopefully this short explanation is enough to set the stage for my analysis.

Instead of a verbose explanation of the impact, see the two tables below. In it I have a comprehensive list of H-1B and L-1B visa problems and correspond that to how this bill addresses each. I also indicate what I believe the impact on the IT profession will be (either positive, negative, or undecided). The first table is specific to the H-1B program and the second is specific to the L-1B visa program. Although I don’t agree with the politics of Greg Siskind and wouldn’t nominate him for “Person of the Year” he is one of the most respected attorneys in his field; as such I relied mainly on his analysis which can be found here: http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/the-siskind-summary-a-section-by-section-review-of-the-gutierrez-immigration-reform-bill.html. Although I’m no legal scholar, I could find no discrepancy between Siskind’s analysis and the parts of the legislation I am discussing below.

The full text of the legislation is posted on Greg Siskind’s blog: http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/text-of-hr-4321-the-gutierrez-comprehensive-immigration-reform-bill.html

Table 1.0 – HR4321 H-1B visa reform impact on IT professionals

Issue	Impact	Explanation
Distribution of workers throughout occupations		Section 501 (described in more detail below) provides a commission to recommend the limits and characteristics of workers to be admitted in various employment-based visa categories. The effectiveness of this provision in the bill depends on what recommendations the commission makes, what methodologies they use to make such decisions, and of course who is appointed to the commission. Results may vary from administration to administration.
Numerical limits of H-1B visas		Section 501 of the bill calls for the creation of a new federal agency called the Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets. This commission will include 7 voting members with no more than 4 from each party, each to serve five year terms. Members are appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate. This commission will be responsible for delivering an annual report to Congress which will amend quotas based on their findings of market needs for immigrant workers. Congress will have 90 days to vote down their findings, or they will be automatically approved. It is unclear what will happen to the 65,000 visa cap established in trade agreements. I believe that exemptions from the cap could be rolled into that count for the purpose of satisfying our trade obligations established it GAT. Although I support a market based solution, the problem with this solution is that the members of the commission are political appointees. The current administration is more friendly than the last towards labor, and we have no idea what to expect from the next administration. Our labor market needs stability and shouldn’t shift every four to eight years when the political winds shift. I have suggested a methodology based on unemployment and employment rates in each occupation. This methodology would rely on statistics and things that can be measured – not people influenced by powerful politicians with a variety of agendas. Instead of creating yet another federal agency, I would invest money into the Bureau of Labor Statistics and make sure they have the resources to accurately measure the state of our labor market. Those improved statistics could automatically adjust numerical caps. I would point out that labor groups, such as the AFL-CIO, approve of this measure and requested that it be included. I agree with their motivations, however I don’t see how it is a sustainable solution given the influence of politicians (who are influenced by lobbyists). The appointees to this agency may start out with good intentions and be loaded with pro-labor members, but that can easily change. How would we be protected from anti-labor members of the commission appointed by future administrations? I cannot fully support this measure because it seems short sighted. I would like to know how Congress plans to address my concerns before I support this part of the legislation.
Outplacement of H-1B workers		Employers may not place, outsource, lease, or otherwise contract for the services of placement of H-1B workers unless they get a waiver from DHS. I would like to see the waiver provision removed from the bill because that looks like a possible loophole. Otherwise, this is a real victory for IT workers. This provision is one we must fight to preserve because the biggest violators in the IT field are the body shops. They are driving down our wages and displacing American workers. This is a huge slap in their face. It will put many body shops out of business – especially the ones that only pushed H-1B workers.
Fraud prevention and enforcement of the law		Fraud will now be easier to detect and prosecute. Section 541 extends the length of time the Department of Labor has to launch an investigation once a complaint has been filed to 24 months instead of 12 months. The DOL will conduct annual compliance audits of H-1B employers. 1% of employers must be audited each year and 100% of employers with over 100 employees and more than 15% on H-1b visas must be audited. In reality, this is probably limited to some of the larger consulting and offshoring firms that almost exclusively hire H-1B workers (Like Infosys, Tata, and Wipro). Very few firms fall into the category that must be audited each year. Fortunately, this law will apply to most of the top sponsors of H-1B visas. Findings must be made public. I believe the law should also include the number of L-1B visa holders to determine if a company employs more than 15% or not. Otherwise, they might simply shift to another visa category as a loophole. The bill also eliminates “good faith” defense for employers found the have violated LCA rules so they can’t plead ignorance. Also, the USCIS must now report to the DOL information showing that an employer is not complying with labor laws.
Below market wages		This bill requires that the employer certify that they will pay the employee the highest of the following: Locally determined prevailing wage, median average wage for all workers in the occupational classification, or the median wage for skill level 2 in the OES wage survey. This is an important change to the law that will help reduce the number of workers being paid below market wages. In a recent study by John Miano, there were more H-1B workers in the lowest tier of the wage survey (level 1). Additionally, employers must offer H-1B workers the same benefits as offered to US workers. This includes insurance plans, retirement plans, cash bonuses, and noncash compensation. Fines are $2000 per violation.
Mobility of workers		I could find no change to the law that makes it easier for H-1B workers to acquire another job. The lack of mobility is one reason that H-1B workers are easily exploited. American workers at least have the ability to “talk with their feet” and not worry about their status as a legal worker in this country.
Lottery system as opposed to merit based system		The intent of the H-1B program was to place the best and brightest into positions that cannot be filled by qualified American workers. Although I dispute the notion that “Americans can’t be found”, at the very least we should reserve these visas for the best applicants and not the random order in which the applications are processed. This bill does not change the lottery based selection process.
Foreign worker protections		Prior to hiring a foreign worker, employers are responsible for detailing the terms of employment to include location, compensation, job description, period of employment, transportation and housing benefits that will be provided, existence of labor disputes at the place of employment, insurance, education benefits, and information from the DOL about their rights. Recruitment fees would be barred, and and employers could not violate the terms of a working arrangement without “justification”. It’s not clear what would “justify” terms to be changed. Employers are now responsible for all transportation costs. This includes from the H-1B worker’s home to the worksite and then back to their residence in their home country when their employment is finished. Employers would be responsible for their foreign labor contractors and subject to civil remedies as if the employer had committed violations themselves. This provision will make it more risky to outsource to body shops. Foreign labor contractors known or believed to be involved with violations will be made publicly known in a list maintained by the DOL. Workers seeking relief from violations of their employers will be protected from intimidation, threats, coercion, discharge, or any other discrimination. Employees will not be able to “waive their rights” to protections under the law; employers could not get off the hook because the employee refuses to testify. Overall I believe these protections are good. There is room for some improvement such as clarifying what criteria permits changing the terms of employment and who would determine if changes are indeed justified.
American worker protections		Section 503 establishes an online “American Worker Recruit and Match” system for employers to post jobs listings on. Employers must post on the web for 30 days a detailed description of each positions describing the wages, minimum requirements, and process for applying. Employers must post the job notice in “conspicuous” locations at the place of employment (like the supply closet). This one is always violated – when was the last time you saw an LCA posted? The notorious “H-1B only” ads would become illegal and it would be illegal to give H-1B workers preference or priority in hiring. I believe this part of the law would make it easier to demonstrate discrimination against American workers and make it easier for us to win a lawsuit against body shops. Employers of 50 or more employees in the US will not be able to staff their companies with over 50% H-1B workers. Personally, I find this provision useless in most cases except the offshoring firms who rarely hire American workers. I believe the number should be 15% and apply towards all employers. Employers must offer the job to any qualified US worker who applies and is available for work. Employers must also advertise the job in a publication with the highest circulation in the labor market for at least five consecutive days. They must also advertise based on a recommendation from the local job services in professional, trade, or local minority and ethnic publications. Most of us have seen the video below detailing how sleazy lawyers subvert the law will view this with some skepticism. Why? Because they will find bogus ways of disqualifying American workers. Watch below and see. I believe the one thing missing from this bill are penalties for immigration attorneys who behave like the one in this video. The fact the he is still able to practice law today is concerning. I’m not sure Congress can do anything about sleazy lawyers (after all, many of them were also sleazy lawyers). I’m going to support the employer protections of this bill because they are still valuable worker protections. If anything, the video above demonstrates why we need protections.
Penalties for violating the law.		Those knowingly violating the rules shall be fined and/or imprisoned for up to one year. Multiple violators can be imprisoned for up to three years. Fines are up to $5,000 for any person violating (chapter 2). $10,000 fines may be imposed on employers based on the behavior of their contractors. Employees (H-1B visa holders) may not “waive their rights”, thus letting the employer off the hook. I find these penalties quite favorable. Companies are no longer able to plead ignorance because they use contractors. I believe these penalties will discourage violators. It also has its sites on the greatest abusers of all – the body shops. My only complaint here is that monetary damages are not high enough. Although workers will have the ability to sue for damages, the fines are low enough that some companies may take a calculated risk. Let’s face it – for a billion dollar company a $5000 fine is like getting a parking ticket. Hopefully the additional threat of prison discourages violations of the law. The true effectiveness hinges on prosecution of violations.
Recapturing of unused H-1b visas		Section 301 of this bill sets the world-wide level of employment-based immigrant visas (which includes unskilled workers on the H-2b visa) at 290,000 *PLUS* unused visas from 1992-2009 *PLUS* unused visas from any prior fiscal year going forward. I believe this provision is incredibly dangerous and will create flows of workers that exceeds the natural demand. Even if we have a commission as established in section 501, anti-labor commissions appointed by future administration could use these un-captured visas to flood labor markets and harm American workers while satisfying corporate demands. Fortunately I believe there is a solution to this problem: Section 501 should be amended so that the Congress must vote every year to approve recommendations by the Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets. Currently the recommendations will automatically be adopted if Congress fails to vote. Millions of American jobs are worth the consideration of Congress and will provide a check and balance on the commission. We have virtually no cap on the H-1B visa because of recapture provisions and the last thing we want is a commission that runs on auto-pilot.

Many of the H-1B provisions apply to L-1B visa holders so the next section focuses on provisions specific to the L-1B visa.

Table 2.0 – HR4321 L-1B visa reform impact on IT professionals

Issue	Impact	Explanation
L-1B visa holders are not subject to prevailing wage requirements.		Employers hiring L-1B visa holders for more than a year must follow the same prevailing wage requirements as H-1B visa holders. That would be the highest of the three: local prevailing wage, median average wage for all workers in the occupational classification in that area of employment, and the Level 2 OES wage. Although this is a drastic improvement over no prevailing wage requirement, I believe that this provision will result in some employers rotating workers out every year in order to avoid paying prevailing wages. I believe the law should apply to all workers irrespective of how long they will work in the United States.
Outplacement of L-1B visa holders		Previous reforms made it more difficult for body shops to place L-1 visa holders onsite. The law allowed third party workers onsite as long as the worker was controlled by their employer and was not essentially temporary hire under the management of the unaffiliated employer. This bill prevents L-1B visa holders from working at a third party site without a waiver from the DOL.
Compliance		This bill seems to have protections for the employer from investigation, such as requiring prior notice so that they may respond to allegations before an investigation begins. I find this troubling because the element of surprise is lost and the employer has time to cover their tracks. After a further search, H-1B visa violations are investigated by the DOL and the L-1B violations are investigated by the DHS. It seems odd that two different agencies are responsible for the same type of investigation. This is exactly the type of arrangement that will make it easy for companies to game the system.
Penalties		Willful misrepresentation of fact in an L-1B petition will result in fines of up to $10,000 per violation, employers can be debarred for up to two years, and they may be liable for paying lost wages and benefits.
Displacement of American workers		The L-1B visa was designed to allow company management to work temporarily in the United States. It was originally an executive visa. Today, it is being used as a means of importing cheap labor into the United States. I believe the criteria for the L-1B visa should limit the program to upper level managers and executives within the organization. There are many computer programmers with no management responsibilities at all who are admitted under the L-1B visa program. Many are “managers” in title only, having no direct reports and no ability to make hiring or purchasing decisions.

So the million dollar question: “Do I support this bill?” The answer is yes, but we must work to make it better. I believe that we should support the overall bill as it pertains to non-immigrant workers but seek two major changes and four minor changes:

Must Have
- Section 501 should be amended so that the Congress must vote every year to approve recommendations by the Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets.
- The L-1B visa should be used for only managers or executives in an organization as it was originally intended. Computer programmers and “managers in name only” should not be approved for L-1B visas. This visa has become a backdoor to the H-1B visa because it is less restrictive.
Should Have
- The DOL should be responsible for investigating L-1B complaints as opposed the the DHS.
- The L-1B visa should have the same prevailing wage requirements as the H-1B visa.
- Congress should change the law so that it is easier for H-1B workers to change jobs (mobility).
- End the H-1B “lottery”. The H-1B visa should be merit based as opposed to a random selection of applications.

Abolish the H-1b "indentured servant" visa; Green cards instead

2007-12-31T09:46:00.000-05:00

Over a year ago I had blogged regarding my view that it would make since to abolish the H-1b visa and implement a green card instead. At the time I took heat from some anti-immigration groups who would rather we not allow immigrants into our country. I also have since taken heat from Greg Siskind, an immigration attorney, who somehow feels that providing permanent immigration instead of temporary employer sponsored visas is offensive. Since my first thoughts on a green card instead of the H-1b were published, my view on the subject has been refined some.

Before I get into my thoughts, I first want to address the shallow remarks of Greg Siskind in comments on his blog. Siskind's positions reflect those of a corporate lobbyists, so of course he wants to discredit anyone who stands between corporate objectives of exploitable workers with words like "anti-immigrant".

In my own defense against his untrue comments, I am married to an immigrant, support some form of amnesty, and want to increase protections for immigrants. The tough part about his attacks is that it is very difficult (perhaps impossible) to prove a negative, and it is so easy for him to lob such grenades. I find it disturbing that Siskind would sink that low.

My view is that Greg Siskind is worse than the anti-immigration proponents and that Siskind is in fact anti-immigrant. There is an important distinction between "anti-immigrant" and "anti-immigration". Anti-immigration proponents want to shut out immigrants for a variety of reasons (some not relating to race) and anti-immigrants fall into two categories. The first category is racist, and the second category are exploiters. Greg Siskind clearly represents the interests of those who want to exploit immigrants for financial gain. My point is that a person can support higher levels of immigration and at the same time be anti-immigrant.

I don't believe we need more immigration, but I also think we can support current levels if done right. I believe that we should replace the H-1b visa program with an equal number of merit based green cards (current cap of 85,000 + the 50,000 lottery). The program I have in mind would not be employer sponsored and on the other side of the coin there would be no labor test. There would also be no per-country quota. Family members wouldn't count towards the cap. The goal of a merit based program would be to allow only the best and brightest to qualify for these visas. It would be a race to the top, not the race to the bottom that we see today. Instead of junior level programmers, we would see top scientists, doctors, and inventors. Instead of "first come first serve" it would be "best come first serve".

If you are just now following the H-1b issue, you might be wondering what is wrong with it. Although not perfect, wikipedia actually covers most of the issue. But I'll summarize.

Harm to immigrants
- The H-1b is not completely portable. Changing jobs will usually result in the application for a green card to start over. This is a problem because that process can take years. The end result is that immigrants intending to become permanent residents also become captive workers.

- Spouses cannot work.

- If H-1b workers are fired from a job (or quit), they must leave the country unless they are able to quickly find a new job. This gives employers great leverage over them. Simply put, immigrants from third world countries will allow themselves to be exploited so that they can remain in our country. Many sponsoring companies are quite willing to subject them to such exploitation.

Harm to American workers
- Companies are using the program to lower wages in high tech occupations. There is a Labor Condition Application (LCA) that companies must submit which is suppose to enforce prevailing wage. Unfortunately, it doesn't work. The average "prevailing wage" in the LCA is $14,000 less than true market wages. Prevailing wages are also defined as much lower than what market wages are, so companies can legally use the program as a means to get a competitive advantage over companies who do not use the program.

- The top supporters of H-1b visas are also offshoring firms, mostly from India. These firms use the program as an enabler of offshoring. These also happen to be the greatest exploiters of their H-1b employees.

- Because of diminishing opportunities in software engineering, we now see a decline in Computer Science graduates in the United States. Students are voting with their major, and because of current practices they are choosing to go into other careers. In short, the H-1b is harming the labor market and discouraging entry into technology careers. This is not good for the future of our country since it is important that we lead in technology.

Although there are other problems with the H-1b, those seem to top the list. So, how would a green card instead of the H-1b help solve these problems?

First, immigrants can change jobs at will without penalty and they are no longer sponsored by a company - thus no strings attached. This benefits both immigrants and American workers. Immigrants aren't so easily exploited; as a result they can command higher salaries. Higher salaries relieve pressure on American workers.

Second, we will get a broader skill base. Instead of junior level programmers displacing the scientist who can help cure disease, the opposite will occur.

Finally, this will relieve pressure on our own college grads and entry level workers pursuing IT related occupations, which currently have the lion's share of visas. We will see a return of students to computer science occupations - a good thing for our country's ability to compete globally.

There is a reason we call the H-1b an indentured servant visa. I recently watched the movie "Amazing Grace" and I was amazed at how the same arguments used in support of slavery are now being used in support of the H-1b visa. Greg Siskind represents our modern day version of slave traders. Sure the H-1b isn't on the same moral level as slavery, but it follows the same pattern of exploitation against human beings. It makes one wonder if during the years of slavery, there was a lawyer like Greg Siskind that could be called to spin the practice in a positive way.

You don't need to wonder what thoughts Greg Siskind keeps to himself to know if he is anti-immigrant or not. You need only look at his pattern of exploitation to realize that he is in the business of exploitation, and thus anti-immigrant. I believe his actions to be worse than overt displays of racism. Racists act out of ignorance. They can "plead stupid". Greg Siskind knowingly helps in the exploitation of people for profit. He simply cannot plea ignorance.

Greg Siskind calling me anti-immigrant is like a slave trader calling the abolitionist anti-African. I'm sure in their twisted minds, they may have thought they were actually doing the slaves a favor. I wonder if Siskind thinks the same way regarding the people he helps to exploit.

Software Engineering Shedding Jobs in 2006

2006-11-24T22:46:00.000-05:00

According to analysis by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), in Q3 2006 American Software Engineers, Computer Scientists and Systems Analysts have lost jobs this year over last year - a net loss of 93,000. This is amazing given recent claims from the IT industry and lobbyists claim they are unable to find qualified IT professionals in the United States.

What is even more amazing is that the Commerce Department continues to release overly optimistic reports supporting the claims of the IT industry. Overly optimistic is being kind - they are in fact lying. The best employment data available proves that American software professionals are losing jobs. This is a direct result of our government not representing the interests of the middle class.

It is no wonder that American students are turning away from Computer Science majors. This is an urgent issue. In order for America to remain competitive in the global market, we must be the best when it comes to software engineering and innovation. Our government, and private enterprise in their rush to offshore - are failing us.

H-1b "indentured servant" visa being pushed by tech lobby

2006-11-15T20:00:00.000-05:00

The New York Times is once again showing their bias, releasing an H-1b related article without as much of a mention that there is opposition from both American and Indian labor groups - and for good reason.

The tech companies want access to an exploitable class of labor; hence their desire to raise the cap on H-1b visas. These visas are a favorite for Indian tech companies like Infosys and Tata - who offshore software service projects to India. What makes them popular is that the vast majority of H-1b workers are paid well below average wages when compared to their American counterparts, they are prevented from changing jobs, and the workers are reliant upon the continued sponsorship of the company they work for (or they can be deported).

According to the GAO, the H-1b program is prone to fraud and abuse because there are very few safeguards in place.

American workers are also opposing this visa because the cap is not based on job creation in an occupation. While IT workers were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs earlier this decade, the indentured servant cap was actually raised. There are no enforced protections for the American workforce.

Tech lobbyists will tell you this visa is for the best and brightest. If tech companies were serious about attracting the best and brightest, they would seek a more competitive program. They would ask that standards be raised.

If we truly want the best and brightest the H-1b program would be limited to people who have advanced degrees and at least five years of experience. Salaries should be in line with that of American workers. Numbers should be based upon job growth - not arbitrary caps. Guest workers should not be bound to a sponsoring company - they should be workers on the free market.

Otherwise let's face it. This is an indentured servant program designed to attract cheap labor. As an American I think it wrong to exploit people. As a worker, I don't want to be competing in the same job market as an exploited class of labor. It harms our own salaries and opportunities.

To conclude, I am posting EVIDENCE of the abuse of H-1b workers by a company in Maryland called Axiom. By following the link you will discover what I am told is a typical contract between "body shops" and H-1b visa holders. The first page is a job offer (notice the below average salary for a software engineer) and the following pages are what I call an indentured servant contract. I have blacked out the name to protect the victim. This contract was released to me by an Indian activist seeking fair treatment of Indian workers. Here are some key points when reading over the contract:

Axiom will pay the costs to file a permanent resident (greencard) application - seems nice enough.
Axiom can terminate contract and withdraw greencard application at any time, for any reason. Ok, most contracts seem to be weighted in favor of corporations these days. No surprise here.
Visa applicants salary will be 65% of the hourly bill rate that the client pays. Hmm, so these guys simply sponsor a visa and take a 35% windfall on earnings? In some cases - not sure of this one. I know one worker who finds his own contracts but still pays the "sponsor" (or should we say master) a percentage just for the sponsorship.
Now here is where it gets heavy handed. Should the applicant leave Axiom or be terminated within 12 months of starting the applicant will be liable for $8000 in damages.
Should the applicant change jobs within 12 months of gaining their greencard - Axiom deems this FRAUD and will notify the USCIS. FYI, this is illegal - I consider it threatening in nature.
Applicant is an at-will employee (well, at the will of the company). I think we have established this part by now.
Terms of this agreement are confidential. Don't tell anyone!!! BTW - if you are in an unfair contract, please come forward. Especially if you already have your greencard. Despite the threats, they have no more control of you.

I would like to mention one more thing. Aside from contractual agreements that a company may require the H-1b worker to sign (like the one described above) the immigration process is also flawed. H-1b workers are allowed to apply for permanent residence (Axiom can help if you sign your life away). Unfortunately, if the worker changes jobs the process resets and they are sent to the back of the line, which can cost them years of waiting for their permanent residence. Many give up first and return to their home country.

In short, the H-1b workers catch hell from two sources: the employer who controls their very ability to live in this country, and the flawed immigration policy that sends them to the back of the line if they seek a better job.

The bottom line is this - if you support the exploitation of immigrant (or non-immigrant) workers, ask Congress to raise the H-1b cap. If you are opposed to what I call "slavery-light" then ask Congress to protect both American and foreign workers from this harmful program.

Forming coalitions between American workers and H-1b holders

2006-08-24T17:52:00.000-05:00

I resigned this week from the board of directors of the Programmers Guild. Essentially, it was over the policy to not allow guest workers to join. The policy is in place to "prevent foreign workers from taking over". I personally believe the policy is a result of paranoid thinking and see little to no threat of some anti-labor or pro-globalization group from taking over. I do see the policy as counter-productive and a lost opportunity to become a real political force - as opposed to a fringe group. Obviously this isn't the only reason I resigned, and I am not going to get into details as that wouldn't be very professional.

Although an unrealistically high number of guest workers flooded the labor markets and harmed American workers (especially from 2001-2003), guest workers on these visas are also harmed. They are prevented from changing jobs at will, some are contractually bound to the companies, and the majority are paid below average wages and most work longer hours. In short, they are exploited. American workers aren't the only victims is all that I am saying.

I have concluded that a technology based professional organization that invites all who work in the United States is needed - that isn't afraid to tackle these issues. Perhaps the IEEE-USA is that organization?

The IEEE-USA recognizes the two sides to this issue. They believe that we need a sustainable number of guest workers and that the program shouldn't replace American workers. They also recognize that we should treat our immigrant or guest workers better and more fairly.

Together American technology workers and foreign guest workers can be a political force and get a sustainable and fair system in place. Apart, we all lose to the special interests and IT lobbyist groups like the ITAA.

Hopefully the Programmers Guild will one day get with the program, or another organization will step up to the plate. The Guild has done some very positive things this year and I have confidence that if they hold elections some new leaders will step up to the plate. There have not been elections in the past two years, which are required to be held each year. I am a bit puzzled as to why members haven't demanded elections.

Commerce Department Releases Oppressed Offshoring Study

2006-07-26T06:54:00.000-05:00

The Commerce Department has finally released an offshoring study that it originally refused to release publicly. FOIA petitions were even denied and now career researchers are being layed off as reward for releasing non-biased research on the matter.

The Commerce Department's Office of Technology Policy (OTP), while under the last president Phil Bond, refused to release the report and instead released a 12 page executive summary that even the report's researchers dispute the accuracy of.

This summary glossed over the problems of offshoring and focused on the positive things. Phil Bond has since become the President of the ITAA - an now works for the largest IT lobbyist firm in the United States. That is his reward for betraying American technology workers and pushing his political agenda while heading the Office of Technology Policy.

According to Professor Norman Matloff in his newsletter:

Through both the Clinton and Bush administrations, the Dept. of Commercehas been remarkably even-handed in issues relating the the industry'sclaims of a tech labor shortage, and the offshoring issue. Remarkably, this is largely due to two career researchers in DOC, and their principled insistence on doing objective analyses. Even more remarkably, their political appointee bosses have usually stood by them,albeit with occasional blips. You can read the history of this at

http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/DOC.txt
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/DOC2.txt
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/DOC3.txt

According to Manufacturingnews.com:

The 360-page version of the report describes the types of IT services and software jobs that are being outsourced. It states the obvious: that Indian outsourcing companies "are expanding staff annually by the thousands." The report describes the reasons for the trend including the fact that "venture capitalists are now encouraging U.S. IT start-ups to use lower-cost offshore destinations for software development to reduce the 'cash burn rate.' "

That document is quite different from the original 12-page summary, and it is apparent why Bush's political appointees so vehemently refused its release. The administration "was scared of anything having to do with outsourcing," says one source who is familiar with the report's travails. The Bush team "could not afford even a discussion" of the outsourcing issue.

"The report speaks for itself," said Ben Wu, who was in charge of the report's demise while at the Commerce Department's Technology Administration. Wu now works in the state of Maryland's economic development organization. Phil Bond, who was in charge of the Technology Administration at the time, said he had nothing to do with re-writing the report. He has since been named president and CEO of the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), an organization that took the lead in Washington in defending the practice of offshore outsourcing of IT jobs.

I am forced to call a spade a spade. This is none other than corruption at the highest levels of our government. The OTP has been infiltrated by corporate lobbyists and even worse will be firing the career DOC researchers responsible for reporting the facts:

"what was produced and provided by the Commerce Department in September 2005 was a 12-page document bearing a July 2004 publication date that bore little resemblance to the work done by analysts at the Technology Administration, all of whom have recently been told they will be laid off due to severe budget cuts for the agency and the issuance of a reduction in force (RIF)." (manufacturingnews.com)

We must demand an investigation into this matter. These honest career researchers should not lose their jobs because of corruption. More on this as news unfolds.

Mumbai news reports: Weaker rupee benefits IT firms

2006-07-24T20:20:00.000-05:00

Clearly the weakening value of the Rupee is benefiting companies in India while harming American technology workers and domestic businesses. The following article from an Indian news outlet, rediff.com, details the windfall for Indian companies.

What response should the United States have to this problem?

Weaker rupee benefits (Indian) IT firms

Infotech companies are making the most of a depreciating rupee and have systems in place to hedge the risk inherent in forex earnings.

With over 90 per cent of the revenues of Indian IT companies coming from clients abroad, the rupee's downward trend over the past few quarters is boosting the power-packed results of the sector.

Since IT companies derive a bulk of their revenues in dollars, rupee depreciation adds to their bottom line.

Taking into account the expenses incurred in dollars owing to on-site operations, a one per cent fall in the rupee usually results in a 0.3-0.4 per cent gain in the operating margins of most IT companies, and vice-versa.

Indian Council For Research On International Economic Relations: "Rupee to USD is highly managed"

2006-07-23T15:47:00.000-05:00

According to the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations in a 2003 working paper, the Rupee is essentially pegged to the US Dollar. They describe it as a "highly managed" currency that is subject to intervention by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

According to the paper "India has been in a homogeneous regime of low exchange rate flexibility from 1979 onwards."

American economists have long said that India manipulates its currency to one degree or another, however Indian economists appear to say the same thing. Given that there is no dispute regarding the artificially low value of the Indian Rupee - as the Indian economy has grown double digit percentage points while the Rupee remains flat - we should demand one of two things immediately:

The President of the United States should demand that India stop manipulating their currency. Action will be seen in a rapid rise in the regime once it is freely traded. If India does not stop their unfair currency practices, resulting in the loss of American high tech jobs, we should impose a temporary duty of 35% that increases at the rate of economic growth of the Indian economy - until such time that India stops manipulating their currency.

According to many IT trade magazines the savings gained by sending software development to India is around 20-30%. A fair trading regime would balance the playing field and the best company would get the business - not the company most able to exploit an unfair currency regime.

The United States' lack of intervention in this clearly unfair relationship is causing millions of high-value jobs to be be created offshore. President Bush should not allow India to continue this unfair manipulation of the Rupee; to do so expedites the offshoring of American jobs.

If you believe in free trade, you should also believe in fair trade. Manipulating a currency is no different than dumping and is an unfair trading relationship by definition. Is it too much to ask that our trading partners play by the rules? And if they don't play by the rules, is it too much to ask that our own government intervene on our behalf?

Should my child become a software developer?

2006-07-22T16:45:00.000-05:00

My sons aren't quite old enough to ponder this question, but if they were what would I tell them? As things stand right now, I would encourage them not to pursue Computer Sciences. I have several reasons:

1) Software employment has stagnated the past five years and appears to have slow growth and higher unemployment than other professions like accounting and healthcare
2) Corporations have increased offshoring of software jobs and plan to continue this pattern
3) Software jobs that remain in the United States are often given to lower paid and exploited foreign workers on H-1b or L1 visas; Americans face foreign competition here and abroad
4) Politicians seem inclined to reduce trade barriers with third world countries which will make it even easier and more cost effective to move production overseas
5) Politicians have rolled back labor protections for software developers; they are specifically exempt from overtime laws and the vast majority are not represented by organized labor

If I were entering college now I would be more inclined to pursue an occupation with a brighter future. If you are considering a Computer Science degree, you should first ask your Congress person what they will do to protect the occupation.

Fresh college graduates are finding it increasingly difficult to gain entry-level employment in software occupations. Our unsustainable trade, immigration, and labor policies are to blame.

ITAA: "Raise small business size standards"

2006-07-22T15:58:00.000-05:00

And ITAA press release expresses their desire to raise size standards for the classification of small businesses. This federal government offers incentives for contracts to go to smaller companies as the vast majority of contracts go to larger corporations as it stands. The ITAA wishes to more than double size standards for small businesses - from the current standard of $23 million to $50 million USD.

The government currently sets aside contracts for small businesses. I don't think the government should raise the number of small business contracts awarded by relaxing the standards. The ITAA is wrong on this issue and such a measure will harm truly small businesses who need protections from the goliaths dominating this market.

Instead of relaxing standards, the government should require even more contracts be set aside for small business. The ITAA is hardly representative of such a group.

Are programmers entitled to overtime?

2006-07-22T08:20:00.000-05:00

Electronic Arts (EA) settled for $14.9 million USD with programmers of various experience levels. This would suggest that yes, programmers are entitled to overtime and most especially in California where their rights to overtime are explicitly protected in state law.

Many programmers in the United States are not paid overtime - lawyers for United Employees Law Group are now asking American programmers to submit claims if they are not being paid overtime. Even though federal law may not protect overtime rights, many state laws do. According to this lawfirm, most states require overtime to be paid and do not classify programmers as management staff (thus exempting them from overtime).

What do you think - are programmers entitled to overtime?

Great cartoon on offshoring...

2006-07-06T21:30:00.000-05:00

Below is a really funny cartoon from TechsUnite.org. Speaks about outsourcing American jobs and the state of our profession...

Ken Lay Escapes Justice

2006-07-05T18:48:00.000-05:00

OK, so this has nothing to do with technology. I know.

Ken Lay, the former Enron CEO and convicted felon who was pivotal in robbing Enron employees of billions died while vacationing in Aspen Colorado. There is no justice in this world. Before spending a single day in prison, Ken Lay checked out permanently escaping justice.

Anything left in the Lay estate should be siezed and awarded to Enron retirees. Entirely illegal, but that would be justice. Please feel free to vent here. In this case it looks like Lay got off scott free and there is nothing we can do about it.

77% of H-1b Applications are Certified by the DOL below the average prevailing wages

2006-06-23T17:16:00.000-05:00

Blogspot has some limitations when it comes to formatting HTML. Because of this, you are encouraged to reference the webpage of this blog here: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/H1bSham.html.

77% of H-1b Applications are Certified by the DOL below the average prevailing wages

Normally I detail what an H-1b visa is in my writings, however the reader of this is presumed to know that already. Please seek information on Wikipedia or other sources if you are unfamiliar with the subject and then refer back to these statistics so that you understand who is impacted by it.

In 2005 there were 279,719 LCAs certified by the Department of Labor for Programmer and Programmer/Analyst occupations. The average salary for these jobs going to foreign guest workers stands at $53,024. Median annual earnings of America computer programmers was $62,890 in May 2004; although the average rose slightly in 2005 we will use the more conservative 2004 averages for these purposes.

What this means is that the H-1b program has enabled companies to underpay programmers by 15.6 percent or $9,866 each year. I am a software developer and have the LCA database stored on my personal server, it was made available by the US Department of Labor. Running a simple query returned these startling results.

According to the DOL starting salary ranges are as follows for American programmers in 2004:

... See Link for Data

What this proves is that the H-1b program is being used for labor arbitrage - simply put companies are flooding the labor markets in an effort to lower labor costs. 46% percent of all H-1b programmers are certified by the Department of Labor for pay BELOW $50,000 each year. Additionally, 77% of programmers are certified for wages below the average prevailing wage in this occupation.

This has been driven by deception from industry lobbyists like the ITAA. They say there have been shortages of programmers. In fact, programmers have less jobs as they did in the year 2000. Many people still may believe that there is a shortage of programmers because of misinformation. I produced a paper that should dispell this myth: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf.

Another myth is that H-1b visas fill hard to find jobs. That may be true in select occupations, however the vast majority of H-1b visas fill jobs where there are not shortages of skilled labor, just shortages of cheap labor. These numbers suggest otherwise:

Total LCA Applications in 2005

Occupation...............................Applications.......Percent of Total (Rounded)
Programmer.........................................279,719.....................46%
Non-Programmer IT Jobs.................132,627.....................22%
Non-IT Jobs.........................................199,466.....................33%

The reason I focus on Programmer jobs is because the vast majority of applications is for these jobs - as seen above. Many people ask why the Programmers Guild seems to just focus on this issue, well now you know. 68% of all H-1b visa applications are for IT-related positions so it is only natural that we take a lead on this issue.

One solution to this problem, since so many companies are looking for cheap labor as opposed to highly skilled labor, is to set the a minimum wage at the average. If the H-1b becomes a visa designed to deliver quality workers as opposed to a large number of low paid workers it will meet less opposition. In addition to fair pay for the workers on H-1b visas, we must prevent American workers from being displaced. Although my other paper details such a method, there are many factors to consider.

Some top hitters include

... Read the actual paper ...

If the goal of the H-1b program is to replace American workers and provide corporations with exploitable and cheap labor, then it is working just fine. If the goal is to provide corporations with truly high skilled labor, then it is falling short. Our proposals work towards that goal and should be supported by any legitimate company with a legitimate need. Those opposing us are most likely abusers of the system.

Here was the query run so everyone knows this is legit and open. FYI Software Engineer positions were not a part of this result set. Companies claim they need "software engineers" - so why are over 2/3 of the IT jobs just for "PROGRAMMERS" ???

select sum(nbr_immigrants) total, truncate(avg(wage_rate_1),2) AveragePay
from lca
where rate_per_1 = 'Year'
and Approval_Status = 'Certified'
and job_code like ('03%')
and ucase(job_title) like ('%PROGRAMMER%')
Order by total;

Bush insider and Commerce undersecretary to head IT Lobbyist Firm: ITAA

2006-06-19T20:48:00.000-05:00

Replacing Harris Miller as "Enemy #1" of IT workers at the ITAA, an IT industry association intent on harming IT workers through labor arbitrage, is Phillip Bond. He is a Bush insider and and just quit his job as head of the Office of Technology Policy (OTP) at the Commerce Department.

This is truly troublesome. It puts into question the independence of the OTP. This is clearly an unholy marriage between industry and government. The OTP should distance itself from the ITAA and this sad and irresponsible move.

Literally days before announcing a move to the ITAA Bond spoke on behalf of the government for their board of directors as reported here: http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=PLCWCZAFT3ZB2QSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=22101653.

All I can say is that Bush Administration officials have been a sad a cruel joke once again. But is anyone really surprised when a Bush insider becomes an industry lobbyist? The OTP by the way is the same organization claiming millions of IT jobs would be created, but then had to eat their words when we actually lost jobs. They have always had close ties to industry and no ties to IT professionals. Amazing - they claim to want to create jobs but not once have they spoken to labor groups about labor specific issues. Of course they always find time to meet with industry lobby groups.

Shame on them all! This government is suppose to be of and for the people. Instead, the OTP represents a sellout of our national interests. As Homer Simpson would say: BOOOOOOOH!!!

The only question now is who's image to place on my dart board now. Does Harris Miller come down? Not just yet. I'm still waiting to see his next move.

Programmers file federal complaints over 'H-1B only' ads

2006-06-19T20:38:00.000-05:00

In one of our most agressive moves to combat discrimination, the Programmers Guild has today filed over 300 complaints with the US Department of Justice for discriminatory ads. FYI I am on the board of directors of the non-profit Programmers Guild. Here is what ComputerWorld has to say about the complaints:

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9001285
June 19, 2006 (Computerworld) -- The Programmers Guild is filing a stack of complaints with the U.S. Department of Justice against some 300 IT employers it says are discriminating against U.S. citizens and permanent residents by placing advertisements that specifically seek "H-1B only" visa holders or workers who have student or L-1 visas.

John Miano, founder of the Summit, N.J.-based Programmers Guild, said today that he has collected some 1,500 IT job advertisements in the past six weeks from a variety of online jobs boards that express preference for hiring visa holders. Miano said the practice is widespread because "for the most part, there isn't much enforcement going on. So we are trying to do what we can do to bring private enforcement against these employers."

Miano said H-1B workers are in demand because "they are cheap and they make good slave labor." The guild has filed about 100 complaints with the DOJ's Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Discrimination, and it plans to file another 200.

It's not to difficult to find IT job advertisements that seek specific skills, and H-1B opponents have long circulated examples of these advertisements on mailing lists.

For instance, in a search on the job board run by Dice Inc., iGate Mastech, a Pittsburgh-based IT staffing agency with about 1,000 employees, has an advertisement for eight Java developers with three to five years of Java development experience. The ad says: "Only looking for H-1B visas and should be willing to transfer."

Paper in progress - Economists on outsourcing software jobs - part-1/draft-1

2006-06-18T17:54:00.000-05:00

I am working on a paper regarding the fathers of economics and what their views would be on offshore outsourcing and related issues impacting software professionals. Because I am a software professional and amateur economist a good way to prepare this paper is to get feedback during the construction of it.

The paper's goal is to tie the modern day with the works of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo. The target audience are other software professionals with no background in economics. Concepts should be at a level that people without an economics or finance degree can still understand.

Fortunately, each of these authors are dead - and has been dead more than 70 years. Well, fortunately for us and probably not them. Because of this, their books are open source and can be read freely online as can books from other economists past: http://www.econlib.org/index.html.

In addition to reading literature, I will be watching the Adam Smith DVD which should arrive shortly. That should put me on par with all the economics students who were drinking and partying when they should have been studying.

I need your help, if you are so inclined. Simply post comments as this topic builds.

So in short, be nice. Call me out on something if I am wrong or if you believe me to be wrong. And make suggestions on how to advance the topic. When complete, I think software professionals should have a better understanding of offshore outsourcing and a respect for thinkers of the past.

Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo on the Software Profession
(A work in progress) Part 1, Draft 1
By Roy Lawson

If some of the most revered economists could speak, we can only wonder what they would say about issues facing software professionals today. This article examines the writings of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo. Although electronic based machines, software, and modern day communication technologies were not invented during the lives of these men, their theories are still applicable today. Most software professionals don't have a background in economics; this article is intended to give them a background on the subject and an understanding of how it applies to themselves.

Traditionally a commodity describes unprocessed goods that can be traded or sold such as grain, metals, and livestock. In corporations today you will often hear managers refer to software developers as a "commodity". This term is not meant to have an endearing connotation and is in fact used to describe a service based occupation that corporations wish to trade freely on the global market. These individuals don't make a distinction between the trade of cattle and the trade of human services, nor do they take interest in the social implications of such a concept. There is an indifference to nationalistic interests and a priority given to short term drivers of the market economy.

Software is a significant aspect of our modern day economy and is intended to make corporations more productive. Productivity enables workers to focus on more valuable endeavors, which is directly responsible for increased profits. Productivity can also be gained through lower labor costs. Modern day communications such as the Internet enable companies to move software production to regions where labor costs are lower. This shift can increase productivity because the same output can be gained at a much lower cost.
Moving software development and related service jobs to lower cost regions is known as arbitrage, or the practice of taking advantage of the state of imbalance between two markets.[3]

As a modern day example of arbitrage it is often more affordable for companies to outsource jobs to Indian companies where there is a large supply of educated workers who are able to live and produce the same services at a fraction of the cost. This is achieved through a variety of market imbalances. First, India is a less developed economy with a large population of low-skilled producers. The vast supply of workers at the bottom of the class hierarchy enable those at the top, such as software developers, to have a much lower cost of living than their counterparts in the United States. Thus their cost to produce the same amount of output is much lower. In this case, success in global trade is achieved artificially by means of mass poverty.

Other market disparities also exist in India such as a currency regime that is pegged to a basket of other currencies, meaning it is not traded on the open market as is the custom of more developed nations. Because of this the growth in the Indian currency regime will not be the same as the growth in the Indian economy. This creates an imbalance between other markets and an opportunity for arbitrage to exist.

Another form of arbitrage in American labor markets include the importation of workers from other countries on certain guest worker visa programs. These workers are often exploited because of their immigration status; company sponsorship is required for immigration purposes so their ability to work freely in the open market is restricted. Because of such restrictions, these workers produce the same product for lower salaries and will work longer hours in what amounts to a modern day form of indentured servitude. Should the workers request higher salaries or more advantageous working conditions the company may terminate not only their employment but their right to live and work in the United States. This unfair advantage makes many foreign guest workers more productive (by means of disparity) and thus a natural choice for employment over indigenous workers.

All of the conditions described are hardly new concepts but there are most certainly some modern day twists when compared with the times of our economic forefathers. In 1776 Adam Smith published An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.[1] One obvious answer to global trade disparities is of course trade restrictions. According to Smith creating a "monopoly of the home market" through high duties or absolute prohibitions secures the domestic industry employed in the protected market which "gives greater encouragement to that particular species of industry which enjoys it, and frequently turns towards that employment a greater share of both the labour and stock of the society than would otherwise have gone to it."

Despite the obvious benefits of such home market protections to a specific industry, Smith cannot be certain that it is beneficial to the whole of society. He goes on to say that "to give the monopoly of the home-market to the produce of domestic industry, in any particular art or manufacture, is in some measure to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, and must, in almost all cases, be either a useless or hurtful regulation."
What we learn from Smith is that in general trade restrictions are not always a good thing, but when Smith refers to such protections he refers to trade of true commodities such as cattle and corn. During his time it was not conceivable that large portions of the skilled labor performed in one nation could be performed in the other by means of technology. Another difference between the economy as Smith knew it and today is that the economies Smith studied throughout Europe were either engaged largely in agricultural or industrial endeavors; high-tech services of today are a relatively new phenomenon.

One could argue that the world as Adam Smith knew it (Europe) was actually flatter than the world as we know it today, to borrow from Thomas Friedman. The economies throughout Europe were much more similar to each other than the economies of India and China when compared to more mature economies like the United States and Japan. These differences have an enormous impact on domestic labor markets.

Smith did address the inequalities of labor and pointed out three major sources. These inequalities include restraining competition, increasing competition beyond what it naturally would be, and finally obstructing the free movement of labor from employer to employer and place to place.

The software occupations are not restrictive at all; there are few unions, no apprenticeships, and no professional licensing requirements as seen in professions such as law, finance, and health care occupations. Generally, employers prefer a four year degree and some form of certification from software professionals. Given the advanced knowledge required to practice in the profession this seems reasonable.

A clear inequality found in the United States is increasing competition beyond what it naturally would be. This can be seen in the importation of foreign labor intended to artificially increase the supply of workers in software occupations. An example of this is the authorization of foreign guest workers via the H-1b visa. According to the U.S. Department of Labor in 2002 American companies reduced employment in the software occupations by 139,000 while increasing foreign guest workers by 110,713 workers in the same occupations.[2]

As previously stated, these foreign guest workers also face obstructed movement from employer to employer; immigration policy requires that employers sponsor them and they are restricted from changing employers. Doing so can reset any pending immigration requests such as permanent residence. A pause in employment may also require the worker to leave the country, creating an unnatural tie between employee and employer. This satisfies the third inequality identified by Smith.

Smith plainly separated the trade of goods and labor; he recognized that "the only property which every man has is his own labour, is it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable." Smith goes on to say that hindering man from practicing their trade is "a plain violation of this most sacred property." Smith would no doubt take offense to the results of outsourcing service related jobs to foreign nations for the sole purpose of labor arbitrage. This is not a desirable result of trade relationships as described by Smith.

So are software developers commodities? No, and absolutely no. A more probable technology based commodity may be the trade of bandwidth; our current networks have a limited capacity, there is no concentration of supply or demand, and pricing is both volatile and indexed. This is simply not the case with software services, although most companies would love for it to be so. Could software products and not the producers themselves be commodities? Under some circumstances and debatable use of the word, it is possible. An example of this may be open source software or commercial off the shelf software (COTS), however even this is quite a loose interpretation of the word.

The term "commodity" as applied towards software professionals is used incorrectly by technology companies to define jobs which are targets of outsourcing to a foreign market. Semantics aside, the reasons for outsourcing these jobs (lower wages) are, as established by Adam Smith, based upon unfair trade conditions that allow companies to take advantage of the disparities between U.S. and foreign markets. Trade protections should exist to remedy disparities but not to the point of creating a "monopoly of the home market." Ideally, Adam Smith would prefer that countries correct disparities but in the interim he would not fault a nation for protecting their national interests through duties designed to correct such disparities.

David Ricardo was drawn into economics after reading The Wealth of Nations. He greatly expanded upon Smith's works and developed the theory of Comparative Advantage in Principles of Political Economy which was published in 1817. His theory is often used to justify trends such as outsourcing. To be sure, outsourcing is not inherently a bad thing unless the motivations are based upon unfair trade practices; this can currently be demonstrated with the nations of India and China.

Part two...
Comparative Advantage...
Shortages of labor...
John Stuart Mill...

Harris Miller Cries about Flyer

2006-06-10T08:21:00.000-05:00

The flyer I posted in a prior blog created what I call a fake controversy in Virginia politics. Mind you, I did not create the flyer. Miller campaign staff claim that the flyer is anti-Semitic because of the "hooked nose", references to him as the anti-Christ of outsourcing, and because he has money hanging out of his pockets.

I believe that each point made by the campaign is utter nonsense.

First, the cartoonist who drew the original graphics TRACED a picture of Harris Miller - so if he has a hooked nose of course the final result will have a hooked nose. I did research, and this is in fact a stereotype (I was not aware of this stereotypes so research was required). However given that the image was traced I don't think that was the cartoonists intent.

Second, an Information Week article referenced many of OUR ACTIVISTS in regards to the characterization of Miller being the "anti-Christ of outsourcing". I have never studied pictures of Harris Miller and given his surname of "Miller" which is of English origins (according to geneology.com) we would have no reason to think Harris Miller was Jewish. Even if he were, it has no impact regarding our views of him. We refer to him as the "Anti-Christ of Outsourcing" because he is a terrible human being with a stated goal of moving American jobs overseas. We don't hate him because of his ethnicity or religion, but because he is an ass.

Third, Harris Miller is rich. He has corporate money coming in from the largest tech companies across America. As president of the ITAA he made tons of money lobbying for the outsourcing of American jobs. He is also self-funding his campaign by nearly $1,000,000. Simply put, he has sold out American workers to make a quick buck.

The bottom line is that Harris Miller is at the bottom of the barrell when it comes to judging a person's character. His actions against American IT workers are simply not forgiveable. And the fact that he is running as a Democrat of all things is laughable.

Miller played the race card, and lost.

According to an AP article:

The flier, drawn in comic-book cartoon style, depicts Miller with a grotesquely hooked nose and cash overflowing from his suit pockets as he orders an underling to find ways to export U.S. jobs overseas. The flier refers to Miller as the "anti-Christ of outsourcing.''

Miller called it "despicable.'' "One of the things I hoped we would keep out of this campaign, because it has nothing to do with the campaign, is my religion and my background,'' Miller said.

Webb said the flier was not intended to disparage Miller's religion or heritage and apologized if it was perceived that way.

"I would not in any way look at that and say that it was anti-Semitic. Harris is the one who's played the race card in this campaign by distorting my views on affirmative action,'' said Webb, a Republican-turned-Democrat and best-selling author.

Because Miller is so offended by the comic, I have decided to edit it - removing things he may find offensive to his religion.

I will not take out the money coming from his pockets because that is factually true. I am using his actual image in each slide from actual Harris Miller footage - notice the final image. Harris likes to point out that he is a Democrat every chance he gets - maybe he is on to something. Or is he just an ass?

Before: http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/files/miller_flyer_color.pdf

After: Image Link

Paul Craig Roberts: The Death of US Engineering

2006-06-07T21:06:00.000-05:00

This article on CounterPunch.com is so good I am going to submit in the entirety and allow you to be the judge...

Outsourcing Smarts
The Death of US Engineering
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

The May payroll jobs report released June 2 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms the jobs pattern for the 21st century US economy: employment growth is limited to domestic services.
In May the economy created only 67,000 private sector jobs. Job estimates for the previous two months were reduced by 37,000.

The new jobs are as follows: professional and business services, 27,000; education and health services, 41,000; waitresses and bartenders, 10,000. Manufacturing lost 14,000 jobs.
Total hours worked in the private sector declined in May. Manufacturing hours worked are 6.6 percent less than when the recovery began four and one-half years ago.

American economists and policymakers are in denial about the effect of jobs offshoring on US employment. Corporate lobbyists have purchased fraudulent studies from economists that claim offshoring results in more US employment rather than less. The same lobbyists have spread disinformation that the US does not graduate enough engineers and that they must import foreigners on work visas. Lobbyists are currently pushing, as part of the immigration bill, an expansion in annual H-1B work visas from 65,000 to 115,000.

The alleged "shortage" of US engineering graduates is inconsistent with reports from Duke University that 30 to 40 percent of students in its master's of engineering management program accept jobs outside the profession. About one-third of engineering graduates from MIT go into careers outside their field. Job outsourcing and work visas for foreign engineers are reducing career opportunities for American engineering graduates and, also, reducing salary scales.

When employers allege a shortage of engineers, they mean that there is a shortage of American graduates who will work for the low salaries that foreigners will accept. Americans are simply being forced out of the engineering professions by jobs outsourcing and the importation of foreigners on work visas. Corporate lobbyists and their hired economists are destroying the American engineering professions.

American engineering is also under pressure because corporations have moved manufacturing offshore. Design, research and development are now following manufacturing offshore. A country that doesn't make things doesn't need engineers and designers. Corporations that have moved manufacturing offshore fund R&D in the countries where their plants have been relocated.

Engineering curriculums are demanding. The rewards to the effort are being squeezed out by jobs offshoring and work visas. If the current policy continues of substituting foreign engineers for American engineers, the profession will die in the US.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com

Something nice about Harris Miller

2006-06-05T19:40:00.000-05:00

The primaries for the Senate campaign in Virginia are heating up - and I might be guilty of throwing fuel on the fire. For those living in a cave, the race is between IT Lobbyist Harris "The Job Killer" Miller and pro-labor war hero Jim Webb. So you caught me, I am biased.

Some bloggers are complaining about the tone of this election and the nasty things going around about Harris Miller in blogs. Miller's outsourcing past has ignited a spark, and we showed up with a mission of defeating one of the most anti-labor candidates in the United States today. Uninvited of course. Did I say he is running as a Democrat? Ouch, the AFL-CIO is not happy.

Well, some people have a point. We are very negative on Miller. So I thought I would take this opportunity to tell you what he is good at.

Harris Miller is an excellent lobbyist. He has been able to present negative data and facts in a more positive light. He has made change in Washington throughout his career, and I don't think he had to twist any arms. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish with the millions of dollars made available to the ITAA by technology companies. If I were a multinational corporation I'd have his number on speed-dial.

In regards to our own efforts opposing the ITAA, I am impressed at how Miller was able to convince Congress that our views just aren't relevant. And even if they are, "who is going to help your campaign Mr. Congressman more - a bunch of IT workers or Bill Gates?"

In addition to kicking his opposition when we were down and unemployment was high, he is able to change even our own message. For example, we say "outsourcing American jobs is bad" and he tells people our message is "outsourcing should be banned". Maybe it is our fault for not forming a marketable message - if only we had the money to spend in PR that the ITAA had. The truth is that we aren't after a ban on outsourcing - just a level playing field. Not that I am making excuses mind you, Harris Miller has beat us fair and square.

And when I say "us" I mean anyone in a profession who may have their job outsourced or replaced by low cost foreign workers at home. Well done Harris Miller. You got us good. Something to write Thomas Friedman about - you two would make great friends BTW. So much in common.

Now what I find even more amazing is that Miller was able to make high powered connections amongst other Democrats in Virginia - "friends" even. Enough "friends" that when he announced his intention to seek the US Senate, he got a wink and nod. It never occured to party leadership in Virginia that this man is not liked one bit by labor proponents. It is almost as if they didn't see these attacks coming - like they thought other Democrats would just remain silent. Or maybe Miller had them fooled. Either way, well played.

No, that paragraph is a compliment. With trickery like that Miller can apply these skills and make wealthy men even wealthier. Hell, if he were able to cough up $500,000 for his own campaign he probably isn't too bad for himself either.

In short, Miller is able to take money and his fast talk, and convert it into favor from our government. He is a great investment if you are a company and are unable to gain favor on the merits of what you are asking for. Life isn't fair - Miller realizes that.

In the words of a rap artist I heard on the radio (or was it Bill Maher?) "Don't hate the player, hate the game."

My only question is will Harris Miller go back to the ITAA after he loses the primaries after they made him compromise his values and donate to Republican candidates? Hmmm, we can only imagine. I think the ITAA would be a fool if they didn't hire Miller back. Look, I don't even know this new guy at the ITAA. When he says "not enough engineers, must raise the H-1b cap" people just roll their eyes. Miller was able to do so much better than him - when he misled, people believed him. That skill is priceless - especially as a lobbyist.

I think he will be back on his feet and outsourcing American jobs in no time. Harris Miller, if you do a speaking tour please invite me!!! Bill Clinton and Bob Dole speak at the same events, you know. I'm just saying, it could work. We could invite Jim Webb, but he may be busy this time next year.

-R. Lawson

Shortage of Engineering and IT Graduates???

2006-06-02T22:35:00.000-05:00

The tech industry claims that they are desperately short of engineering college grads. This chart says it all - engineering and CS degree production is on the rise.

So what is going down? Enrollments. One would expect the trend depicted to reverse in the near future because of lower enrollments in recent years. The question is why would college students stop pursuing engineering and computer sciences?

Simple. The career is in jeapardy from outsourcing and the insourcing of cheap replacement workers.

In addition to that, the cost of attaining a four year degree is sky-rocketing. The interest rates for subsidized loans are also at record rates - the highest since Carter was President. Starting this fall, rates will jump up to 7%. To give you an idea of how high that is, three years ago I locked in at 2.2% for my graduate degree.

If this government wants to save the IT and Engineering occupations they had better act quick. Their pro-outsourcing and pro-labor-insourcing positions are taking a toll on our occupation. The government acting to make college even less affordable is simply not forgivable. These politicians use education as their battle cry every damned time they are up for election. So why is an education in American too expensive for many people to pursue?

My favorite campaign flyer of all time

2006-06-01T21:42:00.000-05:00

All I can say is follow the link. This is the best campaign flyer I have ever seen and summarizes Harris Miller being the scum-lobbyist that he is. If you live in Norther Virginia print it out and give it to your friends. And for Pete's sake, VOTE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!!!

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/files/miller_flyer_color.pdf

Supporting Jim Webb for US Senate

2006-06-01T21:35:00.000-05:00

I am reposting a letter to activists and academics that I sent out today encouraging them to support Jim Webb for the US Senate in Northern Virginia. If you would like to participate, please email me at ###NOSPAM###roy@freedomcast.com###NOSPAM### so that I can get the details out to you. Remove the extra characters from the email address of course.

Hello fellow activists and distinguised leaders in academia,

It isn't often that we get this chance to defeat ITAA lobbyist Harris Miller in such a direct way. The next two weeks is our opportunity to do just that - to send an anti-worker industry lobbyist home with his tail between his legs. Please help us in making calls to Virginia Democrats in support of Jim Webb so that we can defeat our long-time opponent!

I can't think of a single person getting this email who supports Harris Miller - he is or course a direct threat to our profession. But in addition to opposing Harris Miller, I want to give you a reason to support Jim Webb. The reason I am personally supporting Jim Webb is because he has promised to be a leader in the fight against outsourcing American jobs and the related issue of insourcing. In addition to that he is a genuine American hero who served as a U.S. Marine in the Vietnam war. Jim Webb later served as the Secretary of the Navy and went on to write a novel which became a blockbuster film starring Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson - "Rules of Engagement". Did I mention he is opposed to outsourcing American jobs?

The choice is simple - a war hero opposed to outsourcing American jobs or an industry lobbyist who has turned outsourcing our jobs into a career. Unfortunately the industry lobbyist has a war-chest of money and he is spending big time in attack ads. The threat is real and I am counting on a former Marine to neutralize it.

Jim Webb is also counting on us, so let's show him and the Democratic party that technology professionals, activists, and academia are able to mobilize and become a respected force in politics today. Our reputation and ability to be taken seriously by politicians depends on your actions NOW, and in this case there is no later. Send Congress a message that we matter and that our profession should be taken seriously! If we are able to mobilize and impact this campaign, our message will be heard loud and clear.

Activists -- Please forward the email pasted below which was sent to us from the Field Director of the Webb campaign, and is intended to be sent to all American technology professionals. We need your help in getting the word out! We have talked the talk now let's walk the walk!!!

Best Regards,

Roy Lawson

Sun to lay off 5000 employees

2006-05-31T18:30:00.000-05:00

Layoffs seem to be common place in our new global economy. Sun Microsystems posted a $217 million loss in the most recent quarter. Ouch. Because of this, the company is restructuring and sending more tech workers to the unemployment line.

Hopefully not for too long - Bill Gates claims that he is unable to find American workers and that we need to raise the H-1b visa cap. Bill Gates - meet Sun. They have extra employees - call HR and make things happen.

I would imagine that many have transferable skills that they can apply at Microsoft - many IT skills are not vendor specific and even when they are the concepts are very similar. What are the odds that Microsoft will try to fill it's "shortage" with workers already in the country? I guess we'll see, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Part of the article follows...

Sun Microsystems's will lay off between 4,000 and 5,000 staff in the next six month under a board-approved plan to return to profitability that, the company said Wednesday.

Sun, which has never fully recovered from the dot-com bust, has posted a string of losses or near break-even results over the past five years. For its most recent quarter, the company reported a loss of $217 million.

Sun said it will cut about 11 percent to 13 percent of its workforce, or about 4,000 to 5,000 employees, over the next six months. It will also sell off its campuses in Newark, New Jersey, and Sunnyvale, California, while retaining its operations in Menlo Park, California, and Santa Clara, California.

India's Upper Castes Strike Against Affirmative Action

2006-05-30T21:13:00.000-05:00

Some claim the caste system is alive and well in India. This was a system that created "untouchables" as we were taught in our American schools.

I don't know enough about India to really judge this. I am not sure if this is racism against lower castes or simply opposition to affirmative action. We have had this same debate in American politics and what I would consider a parallell in regards to our own minority students. Just like in America, there is a class of people who have been oppressed for generations. In response to that injustice, a system of affirmative action was created.

One could argue that affirmative action is reverse discrimination and that it prevents more qualified people from attending universities. On the reverse side of that argument is the point that there is a group of people who need a path out of poverty and because of past misdeeds society owes them.

For now I won't form an oppinion on this. I do find it ironic that these Indian students and professionals have a protectionist attitude regarding their own class, yet many Indian students and professionals want the United States to remove barriers to immigration here. I am not sure if those oppinions are mutually exclusive or if Indian professionals want protections at home while at the same time they want to remove barriers abroad. Perhaps one of my Indian readers will give me his or her perspective on this subject.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060530/ap_on_re_as/india_affirmative_action

NEW DELHI, India - India's government threatened Tuesday to fire hundreds of government doctors striking to protest an affirmative action plan for low-caste Hindus and said replacements would prop up crippled medical services. ...

Along with the doctors, tens of thousands of medical students and young software programmers, engineers and bankers have protested the plan to increase places reserved for low-caste Hindus and ethnic minorities in colleges and certain professions.

On Tuesday, doctors and medical students blocked traffic in a handful of cities across India. Protesters in the western city of Ahmadabad briefly scuffled with police, while in northern Chandigarh, doctors squatted on railroad tracks before being forcibly removed. In eastern Gauhati, more than 500 medical students and interns staged a protest at the city's largest hospital but did not disrupt it.

Dozens of doctors and students also have gone on hunger strikes.

The government's plan would increase the quota for low-caste students in state-funded medical, engineering and other professional colleges from 22.5 percent to 49.5 percent.

Backers say the policy would help undo centuries of oppression and continuing discrimination. Hinduism divides people into various castes and, while the system has been officially outlawed, discrimination remains common.

Critics say the lower castes should be strengthened through education rather than an increase in the number of study and work opportunities, because many jobs and school spots already reserved for low castes remain empty.

IEEE-USA blasts Senate high-tech visa provisons

2006-05-26T18:26:00.000-05:00

The IEEE-USA once again lashed out against the Senate's inclusion of an amendment in their immigration bill which raises the H-1b cap with automatic increases of 20% every time the cap is reached.

The President of the IEEE-USA (Ralph Wyndrum) asked the most important question regarding this issue, which I don't recall a single US Senator asking: "how many high-tech workers can the United States absorb annually without driving up unemployment and driving down wages?"

I answer his question in my latest paper: Creating a Market Driven Foreign Guest Worker Cap in Software Occupations.

EE Times (05/26/2006 4:52 PM EDT)

WASHINGTON — The nation's leading engineering group expressed disappointment with immigration legislation approved this week by the Senate.

The controversial Senate immigration bill includes a provision raising the cap on H-1B visas for highly educated temporary workers by 50,000 to 115,000 per fiscal year. It also provides exemptions from both H-1B and employment-based, or "green card," visa caps for foreign workers with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics.

High-tech and business groups lauded the bill as a boost for U.S. competitiveness.
But the IEEE-USA criticized the measure.

"We don’t understand why the Senate wants to expand a program that numerous government reports have found leaves U.S and foreign workers open to exploitation," IEEE-USA President Ralph Wyndrum, Jr. said in a statement released on Friday (May 26). "Fraud, abuse and misuse of the visas is rampant. The program should be fixed before it is expanded."

Moreover, Wyndrum said "the bill opens the spigot on numerous skilled visa categories. The question is how many high-tech workers can the United States absorb annually without driving up unemployment and driving down wages?"

IEEE-USA: H-1B Program hurts small US businesses

2006-05-25T18:47:00.000-05:00

The H-1B program hurts small U.S. high-tech business' ability to compete, engineer and entrepreneur Oscar McKee said in recent visits to Capitol Hill.

McKee is owner and president of O-MC Signal Research in Bloomfield, N.J., a company that specializes in wireless communication and the research, design and development of high-speed Internet and local area networks. He met with Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) and a member of Sen. Robert Menendez's (D-N.J.) staff during IEEE-USA's Career Fly-In on 3 May.

McKee, a 37-year IEEE member, said it is difficult for his company to compete against other U.S. companies that use large numbers of H-1B visa engineers. Because these firms often pay H-1B holders less than the market wage for U.S. engineers, they are able to bid lower on the same projects as O-MC.

"We have found that we are at a distinct competitive disadvantage when bidding against companies that use H-1Bs," said McKee, who served for 20 years in the U.S. Air Force and retired as a captain. "We have been told a number of times that our bids must be lowered if we want a certain contract, yet we find that impossible to do using American engineers."

The H-1B program is supposed to help U.S. companies fill positions when no qualified U.S. technical professionals are available. However, very few companies have to comply with this requirement, and the government leaves it to them to determine the "prevailing wage." The latter makes it possible for companies to pay H-1B holders less than what they would have to pay a similarly skilled U.S. citizen. Rep. Pascrell has proposed a bill, which IEEE-USA supports, that would correct many of the flaws in the H-1B program and strengthen essential safeguards for foreign and domestic workers.

"The misuse of the H-1B program's intent dilutes the salaries of American engineers and injures their ability to support their families," said McKee, whose story was featured on a May 22 episode of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/22/ldt.01.html).

Senate Amendment 4075 - Prevents Automatic Increase of 20% in H-1b visa

2006-05-24T21:42:00.000-05:00

In the Senate version of the immigration bill, a provision that would increase the H-1b visa cap to 115,000 and by 20% each time that cap is reached was included. This provision is of course devestating to American software professionals. If it is passed without change, it will result in the loss of additional software jobs. From 2000 through 2004 we averaged a loss of 8000 software jobs each year - and industry lobbyists still have the audacity to claim a shortage.

The IEEE-USA as well as myself supports SA 4075 introduced by Senator Feinstein. This amendment would strip out the 20% automatic increase in the H-1b cap. This is the provision that industry claims is "market driven". The only driver for this cap is a demand for cheap and exploitable labor.

I have proposed a system that would base the cap off of true demand, and would rise and fall given that demand. The Senate plan only goes up - and doesn't account for periods when American software professionals lose jobs. It has no consideration for the impact on the labor market and is designed to be a labor subsidy. That will drive down American wages. This will discourage American college students from pursuing Computer Sciences and the IT profession.

Unfortunately, SA 4075 may not be voted on because the Senate voted on cloture which limits debate. Please call your senator and ask them to vote on SA 4075. The IEEE-USA had this to say in an update:

UPDATE: The Senate has moved to close debate on S. 2611, and is working through a short list of amendments prior to a final vote on the bill expected on 25 May. It appears that the Feinstein-Grassley amendment will be denied a vote on procedural grounds despite efforts of IEEE-USA and others.

Full text of the amendment:
SA 4075. Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. GRASSLEY) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 2611, to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 343, strike lines 12 through 24 and insert the following:
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (vii), by striking ``each succeeding fiscal year; or'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006; and''; and
(ii) by adding after clause (vii) the following:
``(viii) 115,000 in each succeeding fiscal year; or''; and
On page 344, line 7, strike the semicolon at the end and all that follows through line 24 and insert a period.

ITAA Calls on Senate to Reject Immigration Amendment

2006-05-23T21:08:00.000-05:00

In usual form, the ITAA has worked against reforms to the H-1b cap that would limit displacement of American workers. Senators Grassley and Feinstein introduced an amendment that would presumably offer protections for American software professionals. At this time, I don't have the text of the amendment however both Senators have a history of supporting technology professionals. The fact that the ITAA opposes the amendment means that it is probably a good amendment.

If you were to think of all the nice things one could do to help software professionals, reverse that. You now have the ITAA position on just about everything. The former president, Harris Miller, is now running for the US Senate in Virginia. Fortunately for us Jim Webb is going to win the primaries and ITAA alum Miller is being called for what he is: "The Anti-Christ of Offshoring".

http://www.govtech.net/magazine/story.php?id=99589

The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) today called on the Senate to reject the Feinstein-Grassley amendment to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. The amendment would impose a hard cap on the number of visas issued in the H-1B visa program, thus eliminating a provision allowing market-based adjustments to the total. "The amendment would eliminate key provisions of the bill that are designed to strengthen U.S. competitiveness," said ITAA Senior Vice President Jeff Lande. "The market-based adjustment provision sets a mark and allows the system to adjust itself, based on market need. That is a vast improvement over the current system, which exhausts the available number before the end of the fiscal year and leaves companies in the lurch."

Lande said the talents and skills of H-1B visa holders are critical to U.S. competitiveness. "Other countries in the developed world are removing barriers to talent in order to enable a more globally competitive workforce. The Feinstein-Grassley amendment substitutes bureaucratic process for what is in the long-term best interests of the American economy and American people. We call on the Senate to reject this amendment."

Sustainable numbers + Greencards

2006-05-21T20:16:00.000-05:00

I have joined other Americans concerned about the future of the IT profession. Some of the major concerns are offshore outsourcing and the H-1b visa. Because I take a position that opposes the current H-1b visa, many people assume I am anti-immigrant. They would be wrong. I have in the past supported green cards in place of the H-1b visa.

Unfortunately, many people in this debate are xenophobic and a few are outright racists. I won't mention names but their positions set the pro-labor movement back and discredit our organization. These are the same people who oppose the IEEE-USA's position of greencards instead of H-1b visas.

I believe that the anti-immigrant movement needs to separate themselves from our movement. Our motives are different and temporary alliances should be broken.

The H-1b visa program is broken. But the solution is not xenophobia or the deportation of people. The first part of the solution is to establish a system that is sustainable in terms of numbers. I propose such a system here: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf

The next step is to bring H-1b workers into the labor market as equals. Employment sponsored visas create a class of indentured servants. They need the ability to participate in the free market just as other Americans - they should not be tied to an employer who controls their very existance here. We should be choosy who gets the visas since they are limited - skills and education do matter. Doing this is simple and requires few changes in laws - simply expedite the path to a greencard, and raise education and experience requirements.

Saying things like this jeapordizes my position within the movement as it has been overcome by an anti-immigrant agenda. I have had anti-immigrant activists make threats and attack me personally. The reason is that they are unable to think critically about these subjects and have let rhetoric get the best of them. When you ask some what to do about those here on H-1b visas they say that we should deport them. Frankly, I don't want to be a part of an anti-immigrant movement. I want to associate with a pro-labor movement. If you are an activist and don't like that, that's just too bad.

If these (as of now unnamed) activists persist in personal attacks I will expose them for what they are. If advocates for IT professionals are to be successful we must move forward without the extreme elements - these people are preventing our growth and endangering our ability to influence policy.

And for the record, when I say pro-labor it is not in reference to a union. Not that I oppose unions, just that they are not a part of my agenda given the general lack of support for them in IT occupations.

What Shortage of IT Workers?

2006-05-13T20:01:00.000-05:00

If one repeats a lie enough times, it becomes accepted as fact. The truth is that there is not a shortage of software professionals. The proof is in the Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

From 1995-1999 on average 149,800 jobs were created each year over the last in software occupations. That was very good - and probably qualified as a bonified shortage.

From 2000-2004, the following five year window, software occupations averaged a LOSS of 8600 jobs each year. That is a LOSS in case you missed it the first time.

I am no math genious, but "ladies and gentlemen of the jury" how can there be a shortage of software professionals when the occupation is actually averaging negative job growth? The plain truth is that lobbyists were too lazy to do the math and assumed that you wouldn't call them on it anyways. Industry lobbyists are just dying to revive the "shortage" argument so that they can flood the IT labor market with more underpaid foreign workers - by raising the H-1b visa cap.

But you are too smart to fall for that trick, aren't you?

To see the data for yourself, please refer to Table 1.0 in this document: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf and if you would like to do the math yourself refer to the BLS produced documents referenced at the end.

Software Job Growth Trending Down Since 1995

2006-05-11T18:59:00.000-05:00

Having recently completed analysis of software job creation (source: BLS) since 1995, when applying a linear regression model to past job creation statistics we are trending downwards over the past ten years.

Although we have several years of job growth it is not as strong as it was previously. This could be a result of the "Y2k bug" creating a spike in jobs while globalization and a depression following suppressed job growth.

Figure 1 depicts the creation of software jobs since 1995.

Figure 1

Data: http://www.freedomcast.com/Software%20Jobs.pdf

End of The Road for Harris Miller Campaign?

2006-05-10T17:12:00.000-05:00

May 10th - my birthday - looks to be a good day this year. In what I consider great news on a day that often needs good news, it appears that Harris Miller may be nearly obsolete in the Virginia Democratic party primaries for U.S. Senate where he faces Jim Webb, with the winner facing Republican Senator George Allen. Webb netted some major endorsements today which in my view guarantees an Allen vs. Webb senate race later this year.

National democrats are moving away from Harris Miller. Current or former Senators supporting Webb's run include Harry Reid, Tom Daschle, Dick Durbin, Christopher Dodd, Ken Salazar, Tim Johnson, and Max Cleland.

I believe that they have heard our message loud and clear and would not want to poison the Democratic party with such a rabidly anti-middle class candidate. Harris Miller has a long history of supporting the offshoring of American jobs and has opposed measures to protect both guest workers and American labor from abuses of the H-1b and L1 visa programs - something both Americans and foreign workers agree exists.

Harris Miller is a former president for the ITAA which is a powerful technology industry lobbyist group. Jim Webb on the other hand "is a decorated Marine, former Secretary of the Navy and Assistant Secretary of Defense, an award-winning author and widely respected journalist." In addition to that Webb "was awarded, among other decorations, the Navy Cross and Silver Star for valor as a Marine."

So in this case we have a war hero running against an industry lobbyist. I think that Virginia Democrats are smart enough to pick a real candidate and not another lobbyist in the primaries.

Balancing High-Skilled Immigration: a Recipe for Success

2006-05-06T09:19:00.000-05:00

Balancing High-Skilled Immigration: a Recipe for Success
By Roy Lawson
May, 2006

As a long-time opponent of corporations using non-immigrant visas as a source of cheap labor, there is a need to raise the stakes in the H-1b debate. There are problems with H-1b and L1 visas that harm immigrant workers, American workers, and in some cases all workers. These problems are often a result of a few bad companies not complying with labor or immigration laws.

This article won't discuss problems relating to the H-1b in detail, but one must acknowledge that problems do exist. Instead, this article will explore the question of "how much is too much?"when it comes to non-immigrant labor in the software labor market. It is not enough to simply identify problems as those seeking reforms should offer viable solutions. ....

The remainder of this article can be viewed here: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.html

A pdf version is available here: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf

DOL: Programmers Approved for Trade Adjustment Act Protections

2006-04-25T18:46:00.000-05:00

InformationWeek reports that...

In a turnabout from earlier decisions, the Department of Labor—in a note published this month in the Federal Register—said that four employees of IT services vendor Computer Sciences Corp. that were laid off in 2003 from a facility in East Hartford, Conn., are eligible to apply for benefits under the Trade Adjustment Act. The act provides a number of relief measures for workers who've lost their jobs to cut-rate foreign competition, including extended unemployment payments, federally funded retraining, and relocation allowances.

My Analysis...

This is long awaited news from the Department of Labor. This move does two things: first it offers a safety net for programmers who lose their jobs to offshoring, second and perhaps most importantly it is an acknowledgement from our government that offshoring is harmful for American technology workers.

The U.S. Court of International Trade did not agree with prior rulings that software is not an imported "article" as defined by the act, overruling the prior DOL view that software code must be embodied on a physical medium to be an article under the Trade Act calling it "arbitrary and capricious." In short, the programmers (from Computer Sciences Corporation) won this round. Their jobs had been offshored to India through CSC India.

Tax payers will be required to pay for retraining of those who file for TAA protections. My view is that companies who shift jobs offshore to companies where salaries are much lower should be required to foot the bill when it comes to retraining American programmers and not tax payers, most of whom don't engage or benefit from this practice. After all, companies are the ones directly benefiting from offshoring while most tax payers lose. Doing so would cause the total cost of offshoring to rise and perhaps help save American more jobs.

Additionally, I am hopeful that this ruling could be used as precedence (I am no lawyer mind you) so that we could file complaints in the trade unions, like the WTO, against companies who unfairly dump cheap software services on our markets, which are harming American companies and workers.

2006 Q1 IT Jobs Report by Roy Lawson

2006-04-22T13:55:00.000-05:00

Today marks the release of the Q1 2006 IT Jobs Report by myself: http://www.freedomcast.com/ITJobsQ106.pdf

I will be releasing quarterly jobs reports and be giving more coverage to the IT jobs situation; the report will be released quarterly while this blog will serve to provide information between such releases and further analysis and opinion of the results.

In summary, Q1 of 2006 appears to be the point where IT jobs have broken even. This comes after drops in the H-1b visa in 2003 from 195,000 to current numbers of 65,000 and a better economy.

On the down side, jobs in the software occupations have seen a reduction of 4% in total employment since 2000 to current date while on up side IT management occupations appear to be experiencing strong gains.

If you are in the IT industry or considering a career in the industry this report is a must read.

Yahoo cracks down on free speech - snitches on Chinese dissident

2006-04-19T12:04:00.000-05:00

Yahoo appears to be involved in another case of providing information to the Communist Chinese government which resulted in the imprisonment of yet another dissident who wants democracy in his nation.

According to Reuters "The Paris-based Reporters Without Borders said it had obtained a copy of the verdict showing that Yahoo! Holdings (Hong Kong) helped Chinese police to identify Jiang by confirming that the e-mail account ZYMZd2002 had been used jointly by Jiang and another pro-democracy activist Li Yibing."

Microsoft shut down an activists website in December at the request of the Chinese government. I wonder if Bill Gates and Chinese President Hu Jintao discussed this issue over tea while dining together yesterday, or if the talks were aimed at billion dollar deals. Gates became the richest man on Earth because he lives in such a great nation - I would hope he would impart our democratic ideals on President Jintao while dining together. Censorship and imprisonment of freedom seekers has no place in a democracy.

If the technology companies won't regulate themselves, Congress should pass laws preventing these companies from conspiring with the Communists to oppress freedoms.

"Harris Miller Hates Black People"

2006-04-05T19:43:00.000-05:00

"Harris Miller Hates Black People" is a bit over the top, and not a statement I would support. However Harris Miller, the Virginian high-tech lobbyist running for U.S. Senate, has attacked his opponent Jim Webb for prior statements regarding affirmative action. Miller has even gained the support of black leaders in his state on this issue.

I don't know what Webb has said in the past regarding this issue, however his campaign site clearly states that Webb "fully supports affirmative action for African Americans" and goes on to say that he "has a long history of supporting and fighting for minority rights". Regardless of your views on affirmative action you should take a close look at what Harris Miller has done to set back opportunities for American workers - black, white, asian, and hispanic.

Many of you know that Miller is a lobbyist - well don't you forget it. He has fought on behalf of the IT industry to make it easier for companies to offshore jobs to foreign nations like India and to increase the H-1b visa cap - importing hundreds of thousands of foreign tech workers as labor arbitrage to drive down American wages and displace American tech workers. The minority groups under-represented in the tech workforce are black and hispanics - thanks in large part to the works of Harris Miller on behalf of corporations.

Prior to becoming a tech lobbyist, Miller lobbied on behalf of farmers so that illegal immigration was largely ignored. What you see today are illegal workers who earn on average $9-10,000 per year which is far below the poverty level. These jobs were once good opportunities for low-skilled workers and paid enough to sustain a family. Now these jobs are a ticket into poverty. Once again, Harris Miller has a history of betraying the American worker.

Black, white, Hispanic, or Asian - Harris Miller has sold you out. So Harris Miller might not "Hate Black People" but he certainly doesn't seem to seem to care about their families nor the families all Americans. Harris Miller is anti-labor, and that is not a Democratic ideal.

If you are tired of the special interests running the nation, you should oppose Harris Miller. He represents corporations and their interests. He is a lobbyist - and I think we have enough of them in Washington.

Infosys and Tata File Fraudulent LCAs

2006-04-01T14:28:00.000-05:00

Tata Consultancy Services Limited
Programmer Analyst
Application=Certified
Immigrants=10
Salary=$17,098

Infosys Technologies Ltd.
Programmer Analyst
Application=Certified
Immigrants=100
Salary=$19,029

Source: 2005 LCA Database; Department of Labor - Approved applications

Infosys and Tata are the ONLY major technology companies certified by the DOL for salaries paying below $20,000 a year.

You would think they are smart enough not to file an LCA at this amount - they must have known somebody would make political hay of this. That will cost them much more than whatever savings they see here.

Please make sure everyone knows that these companies from India are using the H-1b program to replace American workers and offshore American jobs. They are helping to destroy high paying, high-skilled, technology jobs which are vital to our national interests.

The DOL is by law prevented from validating compliance with labor and immigration laws. They must rubber-stamp each application within 7 days, the only ones not approved in 2005 were because of errors on the form - and that amounted to 0.33% - not even 1% of applications were rejected by the DOL!!!

Tata and Infosys should not be off the hook for the lack of enforcement by the DOL. They are legally certifying with this LCA that they are paying prevailing wages - which clearly they are not.

These wages are not prevailing wages for any IT job requiring a 4-year degree in any part of our country. We must demand that the federal government investigate Infosys and Tata under suspicion of fraudulent LCA applications.

If found to be abusing the H-1b visa program they should be barred from participation in the H-1b program permanently.

More H-1b abuses - DOL approves 16,705 H-1b visas for less than $30k/year

2006-03-31T23:17:00.000-05:00

I recently finished importing 2005 H-1b data into a database detailing the Labor Condition Application filed at the Department of Labor as required for a company to sponsor H-1b visa holders. Just to give you a primer if you haven't followed this blog, the H-1b visa is intended for "highly skilled" workers and requires that companies pay prevailing wages.

Unfortunately the DOL is merely rubber-stamping LCA applications - not verifying that the immigrants are paid prevailing wages or that they are in fact "highly skilled". In fact, the data that they collect makes it impossible to verify even if they wanted to. They don't collect specific occupation code or the experience level of applicants - both critical information when determining if prevailing wages are being paid. Unfortunately we can't blame the DOL because the law was written so that it prevents them from scritinizing applications.

To give you an example of abuses - 16,705 temporary foreign workers were approved in FY 2005 for salaries less than $30,000/yr by the Department of Labor in their LCA certification process. These workers are all deemed eligible for an H-1b visa - the visa intended to fill a "shortage" of skilled workers.

Each of these 16,705 temporary foreign workers were approved at salaries less than $30,000 per year or $15 per hour in 2005

(Funny / just sad) - LCAs Approved by the Department of Labor
Kim Chi Factory Worker
Lead African Elephan Keeper
Farm Manager of Llamas

(Not so funny) - ALL APPROVED for < $30k/yr
Title / Number Approved
Programmer Analyst - 2392
Engineer - 857
Computer Programmer Analyst - 1202
Computer Programmer - 67
Medical Technologists - 67
Network Engineer - 4
Network Administrator - 5
Programmer / Analyst - 93
Programmer Analyst / Quality Assurance Analyst - 40
Programmer - 19
Software Engineers - 102
Systems Analyst - 116
Database Administrator - 10
Electrical Engineer - 8

If you are in the IT field and have an H-1b visa this should concern you - abuse jeapordizes the program. If you are an American IT worker, this should also concern you. Abuse drives your salaries down and reduces opportunities for American workers.

This data is readily available by querying publicly available LCA data here: http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CaseH1B.aspx

If you import the data into a table, you can query it using this SQL statement and you will get many more results than shown in this blog - all paying less than $30,000 per year or $15 per hour:

select job_title, sum(nbr_immigrants)
from lca
where (wage_rate_1 < rate_per_1 =" 'Year')
or (wage_rate_1 < rate_per_1 =" 'Hour')
and approval_status = 'Certified'
Group by job_title;

Ask Congress to protect immigrants and American workers from companies who abuse the H-1b visa program.
Ask Congress to enforce the law and to stop the DOL from rubber-stamping Labor Condition Applications (LCAs).

AP: Yahoo co-founder defends support for 'Great Firewall of China'

2006-03-28T19:07:00.000-05:00
According to the AP: Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang defended the Internet search engine's cooperation with Chinese censorship of the Web, saying it was necessary to reach out to new users. ... "In places like China and other places that have different political regimes I think you'll see them trying to react and potentially regulate these kinds of activities. ... But our observation is that it is inevitable that things will become more open and free flowing".

I am troubled that American companies and particularly an American of Chinese ancestry would take such a position. As a democracy we should not make these types of deals with regimes that have no respect for basic freedoms and human rights. Censorship and ratting out activists to the Communist regime is just un-American. Because of the actions of Yang and other CEOs, unwilling to make a stand on this issue, there are activists in Chinese prisons. That is just shamefull.

Additionally, Yahoo and other companies should not be deciding on a strategy in dealing with these issues; our government should. American technology companies should be prevented, by law, from conspiring with the Chinese government as well as other regimes from censoring information.

Tata informer provides insider documentation

2006-03-09T20:21:00.000-05:00
As I recently reported, Tata is requiring employees to hand over their tax returns for themselves and their spouses to the company. This is a violation of a number of laws, which has resulted in a class-action lawsuit. I am hopefull that the federal government considers RICO or labor violations against the company; someone should go to prison over this abuse.

I recently was contacted by a Tata informant who provided the documentation the company requires their employees to fill out.

First, Tata requires (or required, presuming the policy has now changed) that employees sign a power of attorney when filing their tax returns. I have posted this document online (link).

Tata will use an accounting firm for this; the document I recieved via an informer includes links to this accounting firm:

DeFINO & D'ELIA (Certified Public Accountants)
2093 BELLMORE AVENUE, BELLMORE, NY 11710

I have no reason to believe the accounting firm had knowledge of this; I am sure their role will be discovered in court. For now I will presume that they did not know what was occuring as
doing otherwise could be construed as libel.

The other document that comes with this details the instructions and requirement to file power of attorney for both the employee and spouse. Quoting the pdf (link):

Power of Attorney is required to be submitted by an employee with the Company
in fevour of DeFino & D’Elia, company’s Certified Public Accountant
authorizing them to represent before IRS. The POA also helps the designated
Certified Public Accountant to attend to any queries raised by the IRS after the
return is submitted.

Power of Attorney is to be signed by the spouse. This is a must for filing the
return as "Married Filing Jointly".

The next form you should peruse are guidelines for Tata spouses (link).

It is general practice in the US that a married tax payer files tax return jointly with spouse. It is therefore preferable that Associates must file a tax return as ‘Married filing Jointly’ including Spouse’s Income.

I am posting this information for one simple reason: Tata should be shamed publicly for what they have done. I expect them to either settle or lose the lawsuit, but I don't expect the media or government to punish them for their horrible treatment of foreign guest workers. Shame on them.

Commerce Department Suppresses Offshoring Research

2006-03-06T08:59:00.000-05:00
According to ManufacturingNews.Com, "the Commerce Department has refused to provide Democratic members of Congress with information they requested concerning a controversial report on outsourcing of jobs in the high tech sector. "

"The report's brevity as released -- 12 pages -- and the paucity of original research it contains have caused some to question the extent to which it represents the work actually carried out by the agency's analysts. The Bush administration political appointee at the Technology Administration responsible for the report has since left the department. "

Ken Jacobson, the reporter who has followed up on this story, should be commended. I only hope that the mainstream media picks up on this. The 12 page report released was more of an executive summary and according to insiders cherry picked data from the research.

This is just another example of politics driving research and not science. It is shameful that the Bush Administration would allow their appointees to continue misleading the public regarding the issue of outsourcing. If President Bush thought it was such a great practice which was good for our nation, wouldn't he want to release the facts? Unless of course the facts don't match his politics.

Abolish the H-1B; Green Cards for US Graduates Instead

2006-02-27T20:08:00.000-05:00
The H-1B visa is a 3-6 year temporary worker program originally designed to allow corporations to sponsor workers to fill an alleged worker shortage - this has since been disproved in the IT market which is the largest destination for IT workers on the H-1B visa. Until 2003 the H-1B cap was set to 195,000 and has since been lowered to 85,000 with the majority still flooding the IT job market.

After years of addressing the problem of H-1B visas, it is time to push for an entirely different approach. It has become clear that the practice of giving power over a person's immigration status to a corporation is unethical and should be banned. The H-1B visa harms American workers and foreign workers alike; the law was drafted to subsidize corporations with cheap skilled labor and not to protect American jobs or foreign workers from abuse.

The largest share of H-1B visas go to "body shops" or companies that outsource their services. Wipro, Infosys, and Tata (large Indian outsourcing companies) use this visa to enable offshore outsourcing of American jobs. Instead of meeting a shortage of IT workers falsely claimed by the IT lobby in the late 1990s, it is now a supply of cheap labor. The IT lobby predicted over 2 million jobs would be created from 2000-2010. As of today, we have lost 170,000 IT jobs since 2000. So much for job creation.

The H-1B doesn't always go to the best and brightest; the majority of H-1B IT workers are in their early to mid twenties and work for on average $13,000 less than their American counterparts, according to a report issued by the CIS. Don't be fooled, this visa is not filling high-skilled jobs that Americans are unwilling to do or not trained to do.

Every time we work to close one loophole in the H-1B, unscrupulous companies are hard at work exploiting another vulnerability. The number of H-1B visas are limited, so it was important that they go where our society needs them most - like to doctors and truly skilled innovators who would make our country more competitive as opposed to using the visa as a tool to export American jobs.

The only true fix to the H-1B is a total ban of the visa. I acknowledge that there will always be professionals immigration to the United States and don't advocate closing the door to them; we should be smart about who we let in and where they go. I would offer them something better than a temporary visa: a green card.

The H-1B visa should be replaced with a path to a green card for graduates with advanced degrees from accredited American universities. A green card creates a worker who is truly mobile and a real participant of the free market. Additionally they gain an interest in the future of our nation and will help create jobs as opposed to exporting them. Any such system should offer protections to the American workforce and show preference to the most experienced and educated immigrants.

Such a visa would have the following attributes:

Best and Brightest
Advanced graduates of accredited American universities should be eligible. GPA should matter.
Mobility
Workers on the green card have the ability to participate in the free market and change jobs at will. If they are being mistreated they can leave without jeopardizing their immigration status. Their ability to negotiate better wages is good for American workers who should not be forced to compete with exploited and lower paid workers in our own workforce.
Labor Protections
When American workers experience difficult times and a sour job market, it is not fair to force them to compete with additional foreign workers. Occupations experiencing high unemployment as shown by the BLS OES survey should be closed to immigrants until things improve. A good measure is the historical average unemployment across all occupations - usually below 2.5%. over the past six years. Any occupation with an unemployment rate above 3% should be closed to immigration. Occupations with the lowest unemployment should be open to the largest share of immigrants.
Education Protections
American students should not be displaced to foreign students. If universities want to accommodate more immigrants they should build larger facilities and hire more professors. The quality and access to a higher education for American students should never be jeopardized.
Permanent
We should not risk losing the investment in education and training to foreign companies. We should want to hoard as many smart people as possible. This is part of being competitive in the global economy. Reward these immigrants with a green card for their hard work and encourage them to become American citizens. Better that they are on our team than India or China's.
Such a plan would only work with a total ban of the H-1B visa. Employment sponsored visas have become tools to exploit skilled labor and replace American workers. We need the best and brightest skilled workers, not the most exploitable and cheapest workers.

Lawmakers Chide Google and Yahoo on China Deals; Corporate Rats

2006-02-15T22:07:00.000-05:00
Article: U.S. Lawmakers Lecture Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft on China Censorship

As a technology professional I often encounters issues that challenge ethical boundries, however the case of Yahoo ratting out Chinese freedom activists and both Google and Yahoo censoring content the line has been crossed.

Google has a policy vowing to "do no evil" but in this case they are doing just that. How many dissidents sitting in prison right now because of the actions of these companies remains unknown. What is known is that when corporations are faced with ethical issues that confront their bottom line, they can't always be trusted to side with ethics.

Our government needs leaders who value democracy and are unwilling to make deals with fascist nations. Our neo-liberal dealings with China are a major setback to democracy and pose a threat to our national security. Corporations need laws created because simply put, they can't be trusted to do the right thing. In this case Google executives were essentially asking for just that.

We can't have corporations acting as government agents for the Communist regime in China, as they should not be corporate cops for the Communists. It is time for reforms when it comes to our business dealings with that nation. It is evident that liberalized trade will not convert the nation into a democracy, as freedoms have been rolled back over the past 10 years. Given our record trade deficits it is also clear that this nation will never respect trade laws, stop manipulating the yuan, or change in any meaningful way.

The sooner we start imposing limits on trade with China, the sooner that nation will transform into a democracy and show respect for human rights. We have tried the carrot and now it is time for the stick. The $49 DVD players from Wal-Mart aren't worth the cost to human rights and our economic stability. Enough is enough.

Tata Accused of Withholding H1-B Tax Returns; Class Action Filed

2006-02-15T18:47:00.000-05:00
In one of the most blatant cases of abuse I have ever heard of against H1-B workers, Tata America (one of the largest Indian BPOs) stands accused of forcing workers to sign over their state and federal tax returns to them. We have been tracking abuse for a period of time and this takes the cake.

Gopi Vedachalam, a Tata America employee, on Tuesday filed a nationwide class action lawsuit in the District Court in San Francisco against Tata America International Corporation, and its parent Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, as well as Tata Sons, Ltd. The proposed class action suit consists of thousands of current non-US citizen employees of Tata working in the United States, plus former Tata employees dating back to 2000.

According to the Economic Times of India, the suit charges that the Tata company has unjustly enriched itself by requiring all of its non-US-citizen employees to endorse and sign over their federal and state tax refund checks to Tata.

Both the Department of Labor and Immigrations and Customs have been asleep at the switch when it comes to detecting and preventing abuse of guest workers and visa fraud. We can only hope that victims are able to seek justice through the court systems. I must point out that our guest worker policy, which demands that the Department of Labor rubber-stamp applications, is prone to abuse because the law was written to actually prevent proactive enforcement.

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP is the lawfirm representing this case. If you have been a victim of these abusive practices by Tata or any other company you may contact them direct via this link: http://www.lieffcabraser.com/lawsuitagainsttata.htm

Washington Times Reports Abuse of L1 Visa

2006-02-12T21:52:00.000-05:00
The L1 visa is intended to be used as a visa for company managers and executives who conduct business in today's global economy. The Washington Times reports that the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general believes the visa is being abused to circumvent limits placed on other visas.

Companies that use this visa for legitimate purposes could have their ability to get quick approvals for their managers and executives jeopardized because unscrupulous companies are not obeying the laws, thus exposing the system to further restrictions. Additionally, those charged to enforce the laws are not, for reasons unknown, able or willing to do so.

I believe that abuse of the visa system is placing downward pressures on American IT workers salaries, and is a contributing factor in dropping interest in Computer Science enrollment at American universities. Students no longer see a future in the IT career, fearing it will either be outsourced or that guest workers will be brought in to replace them for less pay. I hate to contribute to that fear, but the direction of this government seems to indicate that it is well founded.

In my view the main offenders of this law are "body shops" such as Infosys, and their access to our guest-worker visa program should be cut off because of ongoing abuse. The guest worker program should not become a tool to offshore American jobs or replace Americans at their own workplace.

The inspector general called for USCIS to come up with new ways to make sure overseas checks are made and has given the agency 90 days to respond. Pressure by professional groups, like the Programmers Guild and IEEE-USA, in my opinion are a reason we are seeing the government taking action against law-breakers.

More information on this subject can be found at the Washington Times website:
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060209-115735-1691r.htm

The Global Challenge - Fairness for All (Part 1 of 2)

2006-02-11T00:10:00.000-05:00
How does one create a trade and immigration policy that is fair for foreign workers, American workers, and still doesn't stifle global trade and harm business?

This is a tough question but the answer is based upon a simple concept: fundemental fairness. In this post I will tackle the big picture because this is what we most often lose sight of.

First, let's start with the guest worker programs. There are two major programs which are popular in the IT profession: the H1-B and L1 visas. The H1-B is a company sponsored skilled worker visa and the L1 is an intra-company transfer.

The H1-B was created in the early 90s for the purpose of meeting a demand not met by the local workforce. This is a skilled worker visa that has transformed into a "cheap-labor" visa, however that is not to say that the workers who arrive on this visa are not skilled. Recent studies show that H1-B workers are paid dramatically less than American workers with similar skills. This visa currently has a cap of 85,000 per year, 20,000 of which are reserved for graduates of U.S. universities.

The L1 visa is an intra-company visa and is intended to allow multi-national corporations the ability to move employees to where they are most needed. This visa has some problems and had become an alternative to the H1-B which has a cap. Although not intended to be a tool for "body shops" or companies that contract out labor, it has become that.

Fixing the H1-B and L1 visa sytems are a simple task. First, let's recall their purpose: meet a demand not met by American workers. The IT lobby was projecting 2.5 million new IT jobs in the late 90s. Since 2000, we have lost 2.6% of all IT jobs. We have lost nearly 7% of all software development jobs. Additionally, unemployment in IT has been above average for the past five years as well. Can we reasonably argue a shortage of local talent given a net loss of jobs and higher than average unemployment? I would argue the answer is a clear and resounding no.

Given the purpose of the H1-B and L1 and how the visas have been used to offshore jobs to cheap foreign markets we should make sure that American companies benefit from the program as opposed to foreign companies, while at the same time add protections for the American workers. The following five steps are simple and would help level the playing field:

Prohibit companies from using the L1 and H1-B visa to outplace workers; Guest workers should work within the facilities of the company which sponsors them. In short, no body-shops.
Limit the number of H1-B and L1 visas available to a single employer. The H1-B and L1 visas should supplement and not replace American workers. Companies like Infosys and other contractors have virtually zero American employees and this is not fair.
The H1-B and L1 visa should have more restrictive wage requirements. They should be used, once again, for skilled labor as opposed to cheap labor. The average pay for Americans in the IT occupation is $62,000 per year. This should be the "minimum wage" for H1-B and L1 workers in the IT field.
The H1-B and L1 visa should have more restrictive experience requirements. The vast majority of H1-B visa holders are in their early twenties and just out of college with no work experience. I can't imagine that they are able to fill jobs that American college graduates and entry level IT workers are not able to. Five years of experience in the same occupation should be the starting point, or in lieu of that a graduate level degree or higher from an accredited U.S. university.
Enforcement. Currently there is very little enforcement and companies are free to abuse the system, foreign guest workers, and displace American citizens with very little risk. The corporations with the highest number of H1-B and L1 visas should be required to conduct independent audits by a licensed firm and attest that they are following the law. This enforcement should be paid for by higher processing fees.
These are five simple steps based on fundemental fairness. These steps will allow more companies to have access to H1-B workers, and will insure that guest workers are treated more fairly because of enforcement of current laws protecting them. Additionally, this plan would shift the program back to what it was designed for and fill a demand not met by American workers. It also addresses the issue of offshore outsourcing; although we can't ban that practice our guest worker programs certainly should not subsidize it.
To summarize the five point plan, it would ban outplacement of H1-B and L1 visa holders, limit the numbers of H1-B and L-1 visas a single company may sponsor, have tighter restrictions on wages and experience, and finally provide for enforcement of the law which is paid for through higher processing fees. I welcome your comments.
I have reached my one-day word limit for my blog. Stay tuned for my take on trade.

Infosys Technologies Facing Class Action Lawsuit; Avoids paying overtime

2006-02-08T17:30:00.000-05:00
I have learned that a legal team specializing in overtime law in California is seeking to force Infosys to pay current and former employees backpay for unpaid overtime through a class-action lawsuit.

I have provided more information below from their website and would encourage those who were not paid as required by law to pay special attention to your rights if you worked or currently work for Infosys in California:

A leading law firm is investigating claims against Infosys offices in California for allegedly not paying overtime wages to immigrant computer programmers. Infosys has been a leader in off-shore outsourcing and has been taking outsourcing a step further by sponsoring foreign citizens for H-1B temporary visas, in which there is a nationwide limit of only 65,000 (+20,000 US Graduate Students) issued per year.

It is alleged that computer workers from India and other countries are brought here on H-1B and paid considerably more than in their native country but considerably less than other workers and less than the exempt-status requirement.

California Labor Laws protect employees from unfair business practices such as unpaid overtime and benefits. California Labor Code 515.5 states that employees in the computer software field may be exempt from overtime pay if they meet several requirements. One exempt-status requirement involves hourly wages: “The employee's hourly rate of pay is not less than forty-one dollars ($47.81), or the annualized full-time salary equivalent of that rate.”

If a California-based employee, whether a U.S. citizen or foreign citizen holding a H-1B visa, works in computer software and is not paid at least $47.81 per hour or the annual salary equivalent of approximately $99,445, and works more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week, they may be entitled to overtime wages. In addition, the Department of Labor imposed wage requirements on employers of H-1B workers.

Infosys Technologies Ltd., an IT services and business consulting company, employs more than 49,000 employees worldwide and has billion dollar annual revenues. Infosys holds their corporate office in Bangalore, India with California offices in Silicon Valley - Fremont, Berkeley Heights, and Lake Forest.

If you are an employee of Infosys Technologies in California and make less than $47.81 per hour and do not receive overtime wages, you may qualify for damages or remedies that may be awarded in a possible Infosys Unpaid Overtime lawsuit.

Click here to submit your complaint through a secure form and United Employees Law Group will contact you.

President Bush call for Congress to raise the H1-B visa cap

2006-02-02T20:41:00.000-05:00
Today President Bush called upon Congress to raise the H1-B cap. The current H1-B cap is set to 85,000 with 20,000 reserved for graduate students and another 6,800 are set aside for workers from Chile and Singapore under terms of U.S. trade agreements with those countries.

What the President doesn't explain is why it is necessary to raise the cap. Does he contend there is a demand not being met by the American workforce? Is it in our national security that foreign nationals learn advanced skills and return to their home countries with that knowledge - making offshore outsourcing even easier?

I don't presume to know why the President feels a need to raise the cap. My guess is that the Harris Miller/ITAA lobby convinced him that American workers aren't available.

Some of you may be wondering what the H1-B visa is and what all the fuss is about. The H1-B is a source of cheap skilled labor - workers who are at the mercy of the corporation sponsoring them. The H1-B is not used to fill positions because of a lack of experience; the largest group of H1-B workers are 25 years of age or younger.

The H1-B is not filling a demand unmet by American technology workers; during the past five years computer and math occupations had above average unemployment yet these occupations recieved over 40% of the guest workers. Can you seriously argue that in times of high unemployment there are not enough Americans to meet the demand?

Additionally, the H1-B visa is becoming the "feet on the ground" for companies that offshore technology work. This program enables them to more easily facilitate offshore outsourcing. Through a combination of guest worker programs designed to subsidize corporations with cheap labor, and tax laws that make it better for companies to send jobs offshore than keep them in America, workers in the United States are feeling the pressure.

The H1-B program is a cheap labor program; according to a 2005 study released by the CIS H1-B visa holders are paid on average 15% less than their American counterparts. The majority of the H1-B holders are filling a demand for low cost labor as opposed to highly skilled labor. This practice is displacing college students from entry into our markets and because of this many universities now report a drop in Computer Science enrollment.

Studies have shown that there are many technology professionals unable to find employment.
The truth is that Americans in Computer and Math occupations had employments rates as high as 120% above the average of all professions during the past five years. This is according to government data collected by the statistics arm of the Department of Labor. I presented this data in my last blog.

America is one of the most liberal nations in the world when it comes to immigration. I personally value the contributions made by immigrants. However, it makes no sense to add more workers to the job pool when Americans are willing to do the job but can't find work. We need to invest in education and have real technology initiatives in America - not just political rhetoric based on myth.

If President Bush wants to make the United States competitive again he must guarantee that American engineering and technology graduates have jobs when they finish college. Currently, that promise is being broken. Until that promise is filled it makes no sense to raise the H1-B visa cap. Can anyone seriously support raising the cap given five years of above average unemployment in the computer occupations?

Finally, we can't sit silent while our politicians make absurd claims of a shortage in American workers. The only shortage is in American jobs. Do you want a lobbyist drafting technology laws or would you like some input? This is a major reason that I am a board member on the Programmers Guild. This is an organization that every technology worker who wants a future in this profession should be supporting both financially and through action.

Further examing the IT unemployment rate

2006-02-01T19:49:00.000-05:00

Is it possible to have between 40-80% above average unemployment amongst other professional occupations and still have a shortage of workers in the IT workforce? With the exception of very unique skills found in a handfull of individuals, I can't see how one can make that argument considering the growing evidence against it.

In the coming blogs I am going to examine the groups of individuals impacted the greatest by the high unemployment. Two categories of people most impacted include both entry level and senior level IT professionals. College students find it difficult to gain entry level jobs given that they must now compete with a new global workforce. This fact is manifested in the severe drop in admissions to Computer Science programs seen in universities across America. A group harder to track are the more experienced workers - a concern of mine is a lack of data available to pinpoint the pain experienced by this demographic.

First, I would like to present the unemployment rate in another way. If we do a comparison of IT unemployment rate expressed as a percentage above an average across all professions, it is clear that the only shortage here is in jobs for Americans. This data is at a macro level, meaning it is from surveys done nationwide. Some regions may experience even higher unemployment that what we are showing here.

In short, we have Americans that want jobs but can't find them. That can be seen when you look at discouraged workers, and especially amongst skilled IT workers.

Please analyze this chart closely. You will see that it has been a turbulent 5 years for American IT workers. The percent is difficult to read - it starts at +140 and ends at -80. The year begins in January 2000 and ends in December 2005.

Average Unemployment Rate 2000-2005
(Expressed as a Percent Above Average of All Professions)

Overall IT unemployment trending downward; Slow growth in Programmer jobs

2006-01-26T20:45:00.000-05:00
There is good news and bad news for IT professionals. The good news is that unemployment in the occupation is trending downward after a chaotic three years between 2002 and 2005. The bad news is that while lobbyists such as Harris Miller claim a worker shortage of programmers, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) begs to differ in their 2006 occupational outlook guide.

According to the BLS "Employment of programmers is expected to grow more slowly than the average for all occupations through the year 2014. (...) Another factor limiting growth in employment is the outsourcing of these jobs to other countries. Computer programmers can perform their job function from anywhere in the world and can digitally transmit their programs to any location via e-mail".

It is naieve to believe that only programming jobs are at risk of offshoring. As reported in prior blogs and other publications, higher level functions are now being completed offshore. So while countries like India have rational trade policies protecting their lucrative software industry, the United States is allowing jobs of all kinds and throughout the value chain to vanish. We have a trade policy that is both weak and not enforced.

Debunking an IT Worker Shortage

2006-01-20T21:50:00.000-05:00

By Roy Lawson

Many of my blogs and public statements dispute an IT worker shortage. Today I provide actual government data from the BLS which is both current and complete. I am able to get real-time data from the BLS detailing the unemployment rates gathered during the monthly household survey for the past 5 years. This research comes after months of researching the core problems facing IT workers.

Although I believe the unemployment rates are artificially low, we are making an apples to apples comparison proving that unemployment amongst the Math and Computer (IT) occupations is much higher than the average of professional and managerial occupations, and way higher than healthcare -a third occupation to give you an example of low unemployment and a true "worker shortage". Please view the image below. Note that the blue graph is healthcare, red is average, and beige is computer and math occupations.

Non-Seasonal Unemployment Rates:
Computer and Math Occupations vs
Average Managerial and Professional vs
Healthcare Occupations
Range: Jan 2000 to Dec 2005

As one can clearly see from the end of 2001 and beyond, computer and math occupations had an unemployment rate much higher than average. These high unemployment periods also coincide with higher caps on the H1-B visa. Based upon this knowledge I propose reforming employment based visas so that only occupations with below average unemployment rates are eligible for the visas.
This proposal would prevent companies from replacing American workers with cheaper foreign labor when unemployment rates are high, and would divert those workers to where they are most needed. I would propose an additional "stop-loss" of 3.5%, meaning professional and managerial occupations that rise above that should also be ineligible for employment based visas (H1-B). This would prevent the average unemployment rate from rising too high and would give employers an incentive for retaining their American workers.
Although this would not spell an end to our labor woes because of the latest trend of offshoring, it would provide relief to an especially hard hit occupation. What is unfortunate is that organizations like the ITAA (headed by Harris Miller) argued during the times we faced the highest unemployment rates that there was a "worker shortage". This data proves that argument patently false. It begs to question what data they based their argument on, which we coined "shortage shouting".
*Raw data is available real time at the BLS and can be accessed through their web based series report. The graph above utilized the following series codes across all years:
LNU04034028
LNU04034021
LNU04032215
If you have an interest in the household survey methodology it is here: http://www.bls.gov/cps/eetech_methods.pdf
If you need an explanation on how occupations are classified the data is here: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.pdf

GOTV: A Virginia Belle talks about Harris Miller

2006-01-20T13:24:00.000-05:00
You can follow some other views on Harris Miller, the race in general, and participate in a discussion here: GOTV: A Virginia Belle talks about Harris Miller

Former Lobbyist and Senate Candidate Harris Miller Supports Democratic Lobbyist Controls

2006-01-18T20:47:00.000-05:00
Irony is king in the Virginia U.S. Senate race pitting Democrat and former lobbyist Harris Miller against incumbent George Allen. Miller is attacking Republicans for delivering weak reform proposals to corruption usually involving lobbyists --Miller's full time job just a few weeks ago as President for the ITAA; a powerful tech lobby group. The Irony is that Democrats have started attacking George Allen for links to another lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, which is expected to have a political toll this election for some Republicans.

Although any gifts or donations from lobbyists to our elected representatives is an outrage and should be stopped, I have no reason to believe that George Allen was acting any differently than other politicians. I fail to see the logic in replacing a person on the recieving end of lobbyists with the actual lobbyist who was once trying to influence our government in a way unfair to the average American without the money to gain such access to politicians.

The bottom line is that we need lobbyists to start leaving Washington, and certainly not running for U.S. Senate. I am going to stop short of endorsing a candidate in the Virginia race because I believe that is up to Virginia voters, but I think that they should know what they are buying into when it comes to Harris Miller.

The proposals of both parties stop short of meaningful change; politicians like Trent Lott are already on TV complaining about the possibility that they may be eating at McDonalds. I hope they do start eating there because maybe they run into regular people, and start seeing and talking about regular people's issues first hand. Regular people can't afford to wine and dine our politicians at 5 star restraunts, and they certainly can't afford $2000 campaign donations.

Any real change would involve an outright ban of donations from corporations, registered lobbyists, and be limited to $100. That would make for interesting politics where the 30 second attack ads are now unaffordable and politicians are forced to discuss the issues.

Speaking of discussing the issues, Harris Miller continues to dodge questions and refuses to make a statement on his positions while a lobbyist for the ITAA. Specifically, the issues of offshoring and guest worker visas. Should Miller announce that he was not espousing his views, rather the views of corporations he represented, and then share his actual views I might change my oppinion of him. Right now he is simply a former lobbyist and president of the ITAA to me.

FastCompany Biased; Marcus Courtney debates the issues

2006-01-18T20:16:00.000-05:00
FastCompany declares that "Offshoring is good for America" despite evidence to the contrary. I clearly believe that Marcus Courtney of Washtech, a Washington based IT union, who argued against offshoring made a better case against the trend than Ashok Soota, Cofounder and managing director of MindTree Consulting in Bangalore, did in favor of the trend which he would like to call "OneSourcing".

Regardless of what type of spin you would like to put on offshoring, what is clear is that there has been a net loss of IT jobs in the United States. These jobs require high skill and are an important factor our nation's ability to compete and innovate.

Marcus Courtney advocates that we follow the lead of India, who have seen rapid growth in their IT services the past 3 years.

According to Marcus Courtney "one issue that is very different between India and the U.S. is the questions around market access and export driven policies. India has a national policy around IT that it be export driven. Most of the software services generated in India are exported. It is not consumed in the domestic market. In the U.S., what is happening is that services that were once done in the U.S. domestic market are increasingly getting done overseas only to be imported back into the U.S. Our national policy should be different. (...) The U.S. should follow India's lead in creating a national policy around tech that just doesn't let market outcomes dictate everything. This can not only promote more fair competition but also avoid a race to the bottom in core labor standards."

Although we expect companies like FastCompany to side with Indian corporations over the interests of America, it is still unfortunate that they make such unfounded claims.

Harris Miller Offends Bigots: Throws Another Softball

2006-01-17T14:29:00.000-05:00
I thought I would help Harris Miller with his PR. Although MLK was very important to our nation and deserves a holiday where people don't actually show up for work, Harris Miller finds the time to throw another softball. His risk: the bigot vote. I doubt he was counting on them anyways (unless there happen to be bigots who also support offshoring American jobs).

So although I like what he says about Dr. King and this holiday, when should we expect him to defend some of his past positions as a lobbyist? Enough of the softballs Harris Miller. Let's play politics.

Harris Miller Releases Statement on Martin Luther King Day

"Today we celebrate the life and work of an American hero, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. His dream of an America free of racism and bigotry made it possible, as he said, for us 'to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.' Even today, Dr. King gives us hope that we can face the problems that divide us today, and have the virtue and determination to unite as a nation.

"Dr. King's faith, his dedication to the principles of justice and equality, and his steadfast resolve in the face of hatred and violence serve as inspiration to all Americans. Dr. King led America through a time of many wrongs, and gave our country the strength we needed to work through the extreme divisiveness and conflict that had plagued our own nation. Today we honor him and pledge to continue his work in the years to come."

Harris Miller Playing Softball: Says Yes to Cell Phone Privacy

2006-01-16T17:57:00.000-05:00
The Harris Miller campaign seems in no hurry to inform the voters of his platform in his bid for the US Senate in Virginia.

While ignoring hot issues like offshoring and guest worker programs that he supported while a lobbyist for the ITAA, he starts his campaign off with a slow-pitch: Miller calls for legislation to prohibit data brokers from selling an individual's cell phone calling record except for legitimate law enforcement, homeland security, or national security reasons.

As long as the Miller campaign is playing political softball -no whiffle ball, I have some other issues he may want to consider for his platform:
Ban on puppy juggling
Pledge to oppose terrorism
Strong opposition to child pornography
Voter rights
I think the goal of the campaign should be to pick topics that nobody opposes, and then act indignant about some fake advesary who opposes those things.
Sure cell phone privacy is important, but it isn't a controversial issue and unrelated to why he should be the next US Senator from Virginia. Miller should pick some tough issues and argue in favor of those. Let's see how he handles pressure, and if he will defend offshoring American jobs to cheap foreign destinations.
More to come on Harris Miller, assuming he puts his campaign into gear --any gear. Right now it looks like he is in park and still has the emergency brake set. It's kind of like worm racing.

H1-B Workers Swindled and Fear Deportation -- ICE makes Arrest

2006-01-15T12:49:00.000-05:00
"Nick" Narendra Mandalapa, an Indian national living in New Jersey and the owner of Cybersoftec, Inc., was arrested last week for fraudulent labor attestations used to acquire visas for workers on the H1-B visa program. According to some of the victims who have now formed a Yahoo group, more than 300 Indian and Pakistani workers along with their families now fear being forced to leave the country.

According to U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) they "have seized $5,724,592 in assets from the suspect's bank and brokerage accounts in a massive immigration benefits fraud investigation". According to ICE computers and documents from the corporate address of Cybersoftec, Inc were seized. ICE believes that "at least $2.1 million dollars came from fees paid by individuals seeking fraudulent benefits".

One immigration official involved in the investigation said that "Immigration benefit fraud is a multi billion dollar business and can not be tolerated. This type of fraud not only steals jobs from legitimate workers but it also provides individuals to illegally enter the United States and creates a risk to national security and public safety". This type of fraud has been claimed but largely ignored in the past.

Unfortunately, the illegal activities of Cybersoftec may cause undue hardship for victims. One anonymous person who alleges to be a victim of Cybersoftec claims that he was harrased for three months by the company with promises of getting both an H1-B visa and a greencard. He claims to have paid the company $5000 for SAP training and the filing of an H1-B visa. According to the same source the company then asked for an additional $10,000 to process the greencard application, which he refused to pay.

It is against the law for companies to require workers to pay for or reimburse any of the H1-B related expenses. When this blogger asked members of the Yahoo group "lawsuit_against_cybersoftec" in how the scam works a group member going by the alias "rippedofbycs" said the following (Message 1137):

The H1B approval notice - form I797 has 2 parts. The approval notice is sent to the employer by the USCIS and the USCIS doesn't even send a copy to the employee.

The instructions on the approval notice reads that the top part is to be kept by the employer and the bottom partis to be sent to the employee. However some employers like Cybersoftec keeps both the top part and the bottom part and don't send a copy to the employee.

What happens as a result is that the H1B employee gets stuck with his employer. If he needs to change job or to travel outside of US or to even go back to his home country (and return), he needs theH1B approval notice, to show his valid status.
I hope USCIS realizes this fraud some day.

As more information on this scam and the investigation unfolds, this blogger will continue to follow the story. What is becoming more evident is that the H1-B visa program is filled with loopholes that cause the program to be easily exploited. The victims include both Indian workers who find themselves to be indentured servants, as well as American workers who see a decline in job opportunities and wages.

Washington Post: Offshored jobs move up the value chain

2006-01-14T13:58:00.000-05:00
Washington Post staff writer Mitra Kalita's confirms what groups such as the Programmers Guild and IEEE-USA have claimed for some time now: high level software engineering and management jobs are not immune from offshore outsourcing. Her January 11th 2006 article: "India's New Faces of Outsourcing" reveals drastic changes in business that raise questions about the future of the IT profession in the United States.

Kalita profiles Approva Corporation, a company based in Virginia that has facilities in Pune India, and writes that "outsourcing has evolved in unexpected ways. In the past, U.S. companies gave the marching orders to workers in India. Now, young Indian developers (...) and expatriate Indian business leaders are helping India gain a more equal footing".

A highly skilled Indian employee of Approva is also interviewed. Constancio Fernandes started out as a programmer and is now the Director of Engineering at the company's Pune facilities. According to the article Fernandes said that "Most of the companies in the U.S. used to see Indian companies as sweatshops" but since then "The changes have been phenomenal".

According to the Washington Post "Fernandes represents a generation of Indian workers that is redefining outsourcing from call-center and back-office work into higher-level management and strategy jobs -- areas that Americans workers have often regarded as safe from overseas competition". American IT professionals have claimed for years that high value jobs are not immune from offshoring. Many companies are doing all their software development in India, with architecture, design, and support soon to follow.

The trend to move engineering and high level jobs to India is not limited to a few companies. Kalita writes that "At least five companies from Northern Virginia -- all run by Indian emigres settled in the Washington area -- have opened offices in Pune". Unfortunately the staff in Virginia "works mostly in sales, marketing and management" meaning that the highly skilled technology and engineering jobs once done in the United States are now done abroad.

This article should be a wakeup call to not only American IT professionals but also U.S. policy makers who need to be thinking about how to prevent a brain drain of these high-level jobs. Their blind faith in free markets and trade of services is proving to have dire consequences for the IT industry as a whole. We can only hope that our government does not allow American technology services to follow the path of American manufacturing.

Americans need not apply for Indian BPO jobs

2006-01-13T21:54:00.000-05:00
SiliconIndia has reported that the Minister of State for Information Technology, Shakeel Ahmed, said requests from foreign nationals for employment visa for jobs, for which a large number of qualified Indians is available, will not be considered. In short, foreigners aren't welcome to apply for working visas in India.

That's right, the Indian government is shutting out Americans who want to find employement in the IT field -in a country where most of the world's IT jobs are now being created. San Jose had its run, and now Bangalore appears ready to reign king in technology. Unfortunately it appears that not even Bangalore is an option for displaced techies now.

Back in the United States Indians use up the vast majority of H1-B and L1 worker visas to gain entry into American technology jobs. While the United States has a worker surplus and India by all accounts has a shortage, the Indian government locks out foreign workers and the US government floods our own market with low-cost workers.

This is further evidence that American workers are getting a raw deal when it comes to outsourcing of American technology jobs. Although I question the decision of the Indian government, I can understand them wanting to protect the jobs of their citizens. Why is that such a difficult concept for American politicians to grasp? When American technology workers are unemployed at above average rates, it is time to decrease the amount of worker visas issued.

Senator John Kerry denies opposing outsourcing of IT jobs to India

2006-01-13T21:28:00.000-05:00
Once again we can rely on the Indian press and not the American press to report the facts on outsourcing American jobs. OutlookIndia, and Indian online zine, reports that Senator John Kerry (D) is refining his statement on offshoring.

He is reported to have said that "any company has a right to make an economic decision that it wants." "What I opposed was the non-economic choice made by some companies with an eye on tax benefits. I was worried about loss of pension and healthcare benefits". The Senator was also said to be meeting with Indian BPOs to get a "first hand understanding of business outsourcing".

I must say that I am not pleased with Democratic leadership who won't listen to their constituents on this issue. Instead of getting a first hand understanding of business process outsourcing on that side of the globe, Senator Kerry should be speaking with the Programmers Guild, the IEEE-USA, and other groups that represent technology workers.

I would even go far as to suggest that the Senator read the Indian press if he wants a true account of offshoring. They understand the full impact of the practice and in fact are locking out foreign workers from participating in the Indian Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) workforce. I think that may be called "protectionism", but it's only a dirty word when Americans do it.

We are in an economic war for control of the technology sector -the Indian and Chinese governments know this and the American government has no clue. We will be surpassed without leadership who understands these issues and has a commitment to maintain American supremacy in technology.

Now going back to some comments made by John Kerry: I have a newsflash for the Senator. Pensions don't exist in the IT sector; they are a relic of a union past. My children will probably never hear the word "pension" spoken unless it is in a history class. As far as insurance, that is the least of our concerns at this point -so let me make this absolutely clear: WE WANT OUR JOBS.

My only advice to Senator Kerry is to remember what party he is in and who he represents. If he wants to turn on those who supported him the most --like Max Baucus has recently done, I can assure him that he can kiss any chance at the White House goodbye. Just follow what will be the demise of ITAA lobbyist Harris Miller (D) in the Virginia Senate race. Harris Miller is a prequel of what is to come for Democrats who turn against the party base.

U.S. Senator Max Baucus (D) Supports Outsourcing to India

2006-01-13T10:53:00.000-05:00
UPDATE: According to Baucus's office, AP has issued a minor correction. The news service says that Baucus "did not say he supports outsourcing of white collar jobs from the United States, but said instead that outsourcing is a reality."

I just discovered this in another blog and felt that it would not be responsible if I didn't alert readers to this. I have not been contacted by the Senator's office as of yet but I would welcome their statement on this.

My original blog is below.

Original Blog:
According to the Associated Press, Senator Baucus supports offshoring American technology jobs to India. Apparently he was influenced by Thomas Friedman's book because he was quoted as saying "But the world is flat and we must work harder to better retrain our people".

Apparently the Senator believes that technology professionals should throw in the towel and enter other fields. What would he say to those in debt to their eyeballs because they pursued a degree in a field that the US Senate sold to India? Go further in debt? Quit your career and become what?

The Senator, and most politicians for that matter, don't care about our economy -meaning the working class. If they did we wouldn't be running record trade deficits, and they wouldn't be pretending to be powerless over the situation.

They are very concerned, however, about their economy. The economy that sends jobs to India and makes CEOs even wealthier. This is the economy driven by corporate interests and powerful lobbyists like Harris Miller, for example.

I can't imagine any self-respecting Democrat voting for a person who supports sending American jobs offshore. There is no evidence suggesting that sending high paying and high skilled jobs away is a good thing. They made that argument with NAFTA, CAFTA, and PNTR with regards to manufacturing -and just look at what a sorry state American manufacturing is in today. You must look very hard on the shelves of Wal-Mart for anything made in the USA.

Do we want the IT field to follow the path of manufacturing? Is it in the interest of the United States that these jobs vanish? Max Baucus is unable to make any compelling argument in support of offshoring. He digs up misconceptions produced by the ITAA, that have been proven baseless time and again.

The trade policy of this nation is nothing short of wreckless. But what do we expect from politicians who listen to lobbyists and not their constituents? This government has become so infested with corruption we no longer know who to trust. I won't be satisfied until corruption is purged from the Congress and the executive branch of our government. Until then, we are stuck with those who would sit on their hands while our jobs are shipped offshore. And I must assume that some lobbyist made a back office deal with Senator Baucus at our expense.

"But he is a Senator. He has stature and respect that in itself demands our trust", you say. Nonsense. Trust is something that Congress must earn. Until they can prove that they have integrity and do something about the corruption within, they get no confidence or trust from me.

ITAA's Harris Miller Steps Down; Senate Bid Looming

2006-01-06T20:46:00.000-05:00
Harris Miller just stepped down from the ITAA, presumably to run for the US Senate as a Democrat from Virginia. But who is Harris Miller? I'll bet you will soon see him in pictures surrounded by children and puppies, and he will look like a real nice guy. But there are some skeletons in this mans closet. Skeletons that have haunted the tech industry for years now.

The answer to the question "Who is Harris Miller?" is simple. Harris Miller is a lobbyist for the tech industry. He is an immigration lawyer who claims to be an expert in technology. He is a former director of the ITT Technical Institute, and now stands accused of insider trading in a class action complaint for dumping ITT stocks. He would most likely prefer to be called an "activist" since the latest scandals have sullied the word "lobbyist". But let's be clear, Harris Miller stands for the interests of big business. He is backed by big donors. He is a lobbyist in the purest form.

The tech industry first came across our friend Harris Miller when we heard of a "shortage" of high tech workers. According to the ITAA and Miller, the United States was in dire need of cheap foreign labor. And before you know it, this powerful lobbyist got exactly what he asked for in the form of increased H1-B visas. What we have now is nearly 2 million fewer IT professionals over the past 5 years; 400,000 of which lost their jobs after the official end of the last depression.

Miller will claim to be a friend of immigrants. But in reality, with Harris Miller leading the ITAA they lobbied against bills that would have protected immigrants on the H1-B visa program. Or should we say indentured servant program, thanks to Miller. You see, groups like the Programmers Guild and IEEE-USA asked Congress to make it easier for workers on the H1-B visa to transfer from job to job because the system required these workers to leave the country if they ever lost their jobs or were fired. This looming deportation created fear in the guest workers, enabling companies to pay them well below wages of Americans even though a law required them to be prevaing wages (see the Miano report). Many companies still don't obey that law to this day, after all nobody is going to do anything about it anyways.

Not suprisingly the transgressions of Miller against labor go very far back. Harris Miller made his name in labor arbitrage when his firm, Immigration Services Associates, was hired in the 1980’s as a consultant/lobbyist for the National Council of Agricultural Employers. In 1982, the Council raised a million dollars for the campaign of George Deukmejian. “Between 1983 and 1990, Deukmejian began shutting down enforcement of the state's historic farm labor law. According to the UFW “Thousands of farm workers lose their UFW contracts. Many are fired and blacklisted".

In 1995 right as the tech boom was starting Miller joined the ITAA. And true to his form, history repeated itself with renewed calls of labor shortages only this time in the tech industry. What followed was a massive downsizing of the IT workforce. The worker visa programs pushed by Harris Miller even enabled a new phenomenon to occur: offshoring.

Harris Miller has come to personify the problems seen in the high tech industry. I believe that he deserves a large amount of credit for the challenges we face today. The tech capitol of the world is soon to be Bangalore India and not San Jose California. Indian BPO companies like Infosys and Wipro are expanding rapidly and gaining market share within the United States, while companies like EDS and IBM are losing money and laying off American employees. Harris Miller paved the way for this to occur on a path built upon American workers and their families.

Anyone as vehemently anti-worker as Miller does not belong in the US Senate. This man is the wrong choice for Virginians, the Democratic party, the most importantly the United States of America. Groups such as the Programmers Guild have worked hard to undo the harm caused by Miller -without the help of billion dollar corporations like the ITAA has. I can't imagine what a vote in the US Senate, in the hands of Harris Miller, would mean for high tech workers, and especially our nation.

I would encourage the Democrats in Virginia to find themselves a better candidate to back in the primaries. Harris Miller is not a person the Democratic party should associate with, especially when the integrity of our elected officials has come into question. Give Virginia a Senator who will bring integrity and conviction to their office. Find a candidate with unquestionable loyalty to this nation and her people.

IEEE-USA Applauds Rep. Pascrell for Introducing H-1B Reform Legislation

2005-11-27T09:49:00.000-05:00
As anyone in a technical profession knows, the IEEE is the world's largest technical professional society with over 360,000 members. The IEEE-USA has recently supported a bill introduced by Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) called the Defend the American Dream Act of 2005 which was introduced on November 17th.

This bill would require all employers to attest that they have actively recruited U.S. workers to fill jobs before hiring an H-1B worker. This law currently only applies to "H-1B-dependent companies" who have a large percentage of H-1B employers. Unfortunately the law is not enforced; companies like Infosys, Tata, and Wipro have hired very few U.S. workers at their American facilities.

According to the IEEE-USA article the federal Office of Management and Budget found that "The [current H-1B] statute waives a labor market test, does not require submission of supporting documentation by employers, [and] limits the Department of Labor’s authority to review or question [applications]... [leaving] the program vulnerable to fraud or abuse." According to IEEE-USA, Rep. Pascrell's bill will fix these flaws and ensure that the statute aligns with the intent of the program.

Additionally, the law if passed would prevent outplacement (outsourcing or contracting) of H-1B workers by their employers to other companies. We can expect companies like Infosys to lobby hard against this bill because it would effectively put them out of business in the United States if they don't change their hiring practices (which don't include U.S. citizens).

Passage of this bill would fix many of the disparities that have put American software development professionals at a disadvantage and caused abnormally high unemployment rates in our field. This bill would be a win for both American software professionals as well as foreign guest workers who have been abused by some companies --forced to work unusually long hours for well below prevailing wages.

As Americans we need to stand up for the most vulnerable in our nation, which are immigrants. It is in our interests that they be treated fairly.

Review of "Dude, Did I Steal Your Job? Debugging Indian Computer Programmers"

2005-11-21T19:57:00.000-05:00
I decided to spend some money on a self-published book by Nadarajah Sivakumar, and would like to think that as an activist I had some role in provoking him to write this book. I hope he makes a ton of money on it and wish him luck.

Although the majority of the book was one person's opinion lacking much substance in terms of factual statistics, the author had well formed opinions and strong views on the subject of immigrant programmers. I must admit that I found his writing quite enjoyable and in many ways feel responsible for the blatant racism and attacks he and other Indians have endured. Not because I was the source of such pain, but because as an activist we (I) need to take a stronger stand on issues of racism. We inspire others to take action and oppose flawed policy, but how many take their dislike of policy and direct that anger on immigrant workers?

As a member of the Programmers Guild, I can say that we strive to keep these types of attacks at bay. They do nothing to help our cause, and really have no place in civil society. I must admit that I chuckled at his cover page: "To my unknown neighbor who keeps dirt and dog pile on the windshield of my car every morning, and to the thousands of American programmers who bash Indians with filth at online message boards, for inspiring me to write this book." But after the chuckle, I thought it sad that my fellow Americans treat these people in such a way. Anyone who does this should feel shame.

You can oppose immigration and trade policies without being racist. If you are directing your anger at the Indians, the feeling of anger towards them is natural. But as intelligent people we must realize it isn't rational. Direct that anger in more productive channels such as activism and furthering our profession.

I agree with Mr. Sivakumar that immigrants (and especially Indians) have contributed to our society. When was the last time you saw an Indian gang-banger or an Indian on welfare? Most of the Indians I meet and work with are of high character and very skilled. Although I enjoy their company and the company of foreign nationals, I also have a loyalty to our nation and can't agree with any program that hurts our nation or its people .

I agree with what the author says regarding his view on foreign workers: "an American job should not be given to a foreigner if you can find a qualified American instead. If a company is giving preference to an H1-B worker, then that is wrong, and I completely oppose that. I also think that reducing the H1-B cap is the right thing in a downturn economy. You shouldn't lay off an American and hire an H1-B worker. That's against the law, and that's wrong from any angle."

The problem is that the laws aren't enforced and these things do occur. Members of the Programmers Guild want a fair system --one that is fair for all. I don't believe that our goals are that far apart.

I believe that if there is truly a shortage of workers, they should be welcome to fill that void. Whatever system (H-1B/L1/etc.) we have in place should be designed to accomplish five main goals:

1. Meet a demand that the local workforce is unable to fill. Metrics and enforcement mechanisms should be in place to guarantee that a void truly exists. There should be a safeguard in place -- as soon as an occupation's unemployment rate goes above average that occupation should be closed to these visas.

2. Prevent the abuse of Immigrants; they must be paid prevailing wages and this should be certified by an independent auditor at a cost to the company. They should be limited in the hours they may work (50?).

3. Have an enforcement mechanism with "teeth" which is part of a comprehensive immigration program. Violators of labor and immigration laws should be aggressively investigated and prosecuted.

4. A system that doesn't tie workers to a single company which has a simple and fast process to change jobs.

5. Not allow visas to be used in the export ("offshoring") of American jobs. Preference should be given to American companies; Infosys, Tata, Wipro, and other companies that offshore should be required to hire much more from the local workforce. Currently they hire very few Americans and use a very large share of the H1-B visas.

Currently, corporations are writing our immigration and trade laws and they aren't designed with the immigrant or American worker in mind. I understand the anger expressed by Mr. Sivakumar and believe that as a nation we should do better to treat our guests with respect and dignity that they deserve. Indians are our competitors in the marketplace, not our enemies. The fact is that the legislators who passed laws designed to benefit corporations as opposed to us, were elected by us. We must demand more from them.

To conclude about "Dude Did I Steal Your Job", I suggest reading it. He spends allot of time defending the abilities of Indian programmers which I don't recall questioning --although some people generally posting anonymously have. I believe there are cultural differences and communication issues that challenge projects when it comes to offshore teams but you would face similar issues in other countries (like Russia and China, for example) and this is the nature of offshore projects having nothing to do with race. There is some humor in the book, and you will learn allot about Indian culture and the guy in the next cubicle you never knew.

In conclusion, let's be nice to our Indian co-workers. And just because you post anonymously on the Internet doesn't mean words don't hurt people. We need to take our message to Congress and let the foreigners live and work in peace. They can't help us, so it is no use giving them a hard time about this issue.

I would love to debate Mr. Sivakumar on the issues if he is up to it. I am thinking of writing a book: "Dude, I Want My Job Back!!!". Only kidding. My next review will be by a person I believe is of Indian ancestry (Ron and Anil Hira) and the former President of the IEEE-USA: "Outsourcing America". I have not finished reading it yet, but I can tell you it is very factual and relies heavily on government data to back findings. The forward of this book was written by Lou Dobbs, author of "Exporting America" and a host of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight.

Wachovia Moving 4000 Jobs to India

2005-11-20T20:26:00.000-05:00
In June, Wachovia said it would begin outsourcing software development and maintenance work to U.S.-based IBM Corp. and India-based Infosys Technologies Ltd. and Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. The work will be performed in India. The move will displace some U.S. jobs, but the company won't disclose numbers.

According to the Charlotte Observer, Wachovia plans on shifting 4000 American jobs to India. Companies to benefit from this deal include Infosys, Cognizant, and IBM. This is part of a goal to shave $1B in expenses by 2007. He may want to read the recent PWC study that suggests that nearly a third of their "survey participants actually experienced no change in costs in the first year after offshoring functions and 15% of respondents reported no change in cost base even after five years of offshoring."

Others have shown how companies often pay more for offshoring deals because of hidden costs, not to mention the costs of "changing your mind" because once you move your business knowledge outside the organization it is a steep climb to get it back. In a CIO.com article the CIO of GE Real Estate found that "because of cultural differences you cannot simply replace on American worker with one offshore worker."

But let's be honest, I could care less about the business practices of Wachovia and if they are successful or not. I do however care about the future of our nation and my profession. The answer to this problem isn't business logic, but rather chaos in the marketplace. Consumers need to show genuine anger and become aware of the practices of Wachovia. If Wachovia believes this is a good thing and for some grand cause, why won't they disclose the number of U.S. jobs to be lost?

This trend to shift white-collar jobs to low cost nations will only be stopped once the American people and their elected representatives show a will to tackle this problem. Wachovia CEO Ken Thompson is trying to ride the wave of "nation building" and spinning this as an attempt to raise India out of poverty. What of the millions of Americans who have moved out of the middle class and into poverty? What of the American children not covered by healthcare? When will a CEO start riding that wave?

According to Thompson "We need to encourage trade and we need to work on education in this country so we can create a workforce that can do higher-level jobs...We have to raise the standard of living all over the world." I agree that we need to raise the standard of living around the world, but not at the loss of American jobs. When will he start lobbying for fair labor laws, sustainable environmental laws, and an open-market currency regime in countries like India? Currency manipulation is one of the reasons costs are so low there, after all.

In a fair market, Americans can compete toe-to-toe with anyone. Because we play by the rules we find ourselves with trade deficits and job loss. I believe it is important to call Ken Thompson on his hypocrisy; his attempts to spin this as a good thing has left a bitter taste in my mouth and it should do the same to you.

IT Job Losses are Severe

2005-11-19T19:29:00.000-05:00
According to the BLS, there have been over 800,000 jobs lost since March of 2001 in the IT industry; a total of 10%. What is disturbing is that the job loss continues post recession and in numbers similar to the losses seen during the Internet Bubble burst. The image below was based upon BLS statistics and reported by a study conducted by the Communications Workers of America (CWA).

These statistics explain why college students have stopped enrolling in computer science programs; down 23% in 2003 alone according to a report in ZDNET. Computer Engineering has seen a drop of 19%; while foreign enrollment has dropped just 2%. This suggests that Americans are losing jobs in the United States while foreigners retain them -thanks to immigration programs which allow corporations to replace American workers with cheaper foreign workers. This is unfortunate because guest worker programs were created to address an alleged worker shortage. Statistics show that unemployment in IT careers is on the rise. The image below (Provided by the CWA) depicts a drastic shift in our job market.

This is not a surprise because of a trend to shift American IT jobs to cheaper markets, like India, China, and former Russian states. Workers there are paid a fraction of American salaries ($10 an hour gets you an experienced programmer in India, for example). And while jobs move to India, companies lobby Congress to raise the number of foreign workers who are permitted to enter the country.

The H-1B and L1 visa programs allow companies to replace American IT workers with low-cost foreign labor. Why would companies bother moving workers all the way from India? Simple, according to a study by John Mianno of the Programmers Guild foreign workers are paid from 10-24% less than their American counterparts. This is having a drastic impact on the American IT workforce. What is worse, our foreign counterparts are often abused; forced to work long hours with the threat of deportation hanging over them because their employers are also their sponsors.

Offshore Outsourcing

2005-11-13T12:41:00.000-05:00
According to groups like the ITAA offshore outsourcing creates jobs and helps the economy. Although I am no economist, as an IT professional it is clear that offshoring results in a net loss of jobs. Industry pundits claim that more jobs are being created, but do they pay as much and who are they going to? The fact is that many jobs not going offshore are filled by non-immigrant visa holders on a H-1B or L1 visa. According to a study by John Miano of the Programmers Guild, these workers are on average paid 20% less than their American counterparts.

There are clearly inequities in our system that result in both immigrants and Americans being abused or losing job opportunities. The industry claims a shortage of qualified labor, however their own practices are causing students to stop enrolling in Computer Science curriculums. Some universities have reported a 60% drop in CS students and now we are seeing some schools drop the programs all together.

There is no single answer to this problem. Our nation needs to adopt trade policies that reverse the practice of sending high-tech jobs to other nations --services should be part of trade agreements. These jobs give our nations an advantage and allowing them to go harms our nation.

Additionally, immigration laws need to prevent Americans from being replaced by low-wage earners. If there is truly a shortage companies should have no problem paying prevailing wages, and they should prove this through independent auditors.

Immigration laws should be designed with the realities of trade in mind as these two issues are closely related. In order to send jobs offshore, companies need visas for their employees. Companies that send jobs offshore should not be able to use the H-1B or L1 non-immigrant visa programs to facilitate that practice. BPO firms like Infosys and Tata should not share in these visas, as they clearly want to send business to India and not keep it in the United States.

Finally, companies should be rewarded with tax incentives for keeping jobs in the United States, and companies that offshore should be penalized.