Thursday, August 28, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Rob Sanchez over at Job Destruction just mailed out this newsletter. Not only is cheap labor good for companies, its absolutely fabulous for workers. Therefore we really should be bringing in billions of workers and let the riches flow!
"There is no job that is America's God-given right anymore."
Carly Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett-Packard (HP). January 7, 2004
In March of this year the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) concluded that every H-1B that comes into the USA creates seven jobs for Americans. Not long after that Bill Gates testified before Congress with a slightly more modest estimate that every H-1B creates four jobs for Americans.
McCain just topped both them -- he said that every H-1B creates ten jobs for Americans!
Even assuming McCain, Bill Gates, and the NFAP were right, why can't the same number of jobs be created by hiring an American instead? Hiring a U.S.
worker should create at least as many jobs as an H-1B -- plus one more.
McCain said that the Department of Labor should determine how many H-1Bs are to be issued instead of having a yearly cap. Bad idea! McCain would probably appoint his campaign chairwoman Carly Fiorina to replace Secretary of Labor Elain Chao. BLECH!
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Here is one of Norm Matloff's great articles:
As I reported here in June, the Programmers Guild filed a lawsuit against the federal government, seeking an injunction against the Dept.
of Homeland Security decision to extend the Optional Practical Training component of the F-1 student visa. Though the legislative intent of OPT was to give foreign students a chance to acquire practical work experience before returning to their home countries, in recent years the international students have used OPT as a holding pattern while waiting for an H-1B visa. The DHS decided to extend OPT eligibility from the 12 months specified in the statute to 20 months, in order to give the students more chance to become H-1Bs. PG objected that this would bring harm to its members, and that DHS had exceeded its authority. See http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/OPTLawsuit.txt
The judge in the case has now rejected PG's request for an injunction, primarily on the grounds that PG lacks legal standing to sue. This of course is always the easy way out for a judge, as it allows them to avoid addressing serious fundamental issues, in this case the issue of the adverse impact the H-1B program has on American workers. But the judge really went through contortions to rule on the basis of standing, in my view.
In her nine-page written opinion, Judge Hochberg claims that PG "seeks relief that no more directly benefits Plaintiffs than it does the public at large." In other words, the judge is asserting that the H-1B program, about 40% of whose participants work as programmers, doesn't affect U.S. programmers any more than it affects, say, American insurance agents, whose profession is not open to H-1Bs. This is absurd.
Even more absurd is the judge's statement that "even if there was a nexus between Plaintiffs' injury and DHS action, the injury still is not `irreparable' to qualify for injunctive relief because it is economic harm compensable in damages." This is downright bizarre. The judge cites case law in support of her statement, yet that case in question involved a worker who had been fired. The court in that instance refused to grant the worker's request for injunction against his discharge, on the grounds that the worker could sue his employer for monetary damages. Obviously, that is not the situation here, as members of the PG cannot sue DHS for monetary damages, nor can they sue employers of H-1Bs, as H-1B law does not require employers to give hiring priority to Americans. I'm sure some of them wish they could sue this judge.
Here is an interesting NYTimes article...
The world economy has become so integrated that shoppers find relatively few T-shirts and sneakers in Wal-Mart and Target carrying a “Made in the U.S.A.” label. But globalization may be losing some of the inexorable economic power it had for much of the past quarter-century, even as it faces fresh challenges as a political ideology.
Cheap oil, the lubricant of quick, inexpensive transportation links across the world, may not return anytime soon, upsetting the logic of diffuse global supply chains that treat geography as a footnote in the pursuit of lower wages. Rising concern about global warming, the reaction against lost jobs in rich countries, worries about food safety and security, and the collapse of world trade talks in Geneva last week also signal that political and environmental concerns may make the calculus of globalization far more complex.