Infosys Fined $35M For Illegally Bringing Programmers Into US On Visitor Visas 201
McGruber writes "The U.S. government fined Infosys $35 million after an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department found that the Indian company used inexpensive, easy-to-obtain B-1 visas meant to cover short business visits — instead of harder-to-get H-1B work visas — to bring an unknown number of its employees for long-term stays. The alleged practice enabled Infosys to undercut competitors in bids for programming, accounting and other work performed for clients, according to people close to the investigation. Infosys clients have included Goldman Sachs Group, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. Infosys said in an email that it is talking with the U.S. Attorney's office, 'regarding a civil resolution of the government's investigation into the company's compliance' with employment-record 'I-9 form' requirements and past use of the B-1 visa. A company spokesman, who confirmed a resolution will be announced Wednesday, said Infosys had set aside $35 million to settle the case and cover legal costs. He said the sum was 'a good indication' of the amount involved."
Big deal (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure Infosys made more than $35mln by bringing those programmers in the way they did. Aside from not having to pay for the H1B visas, they could pay the programmers much less this way. Of course nothing will change. They'll start doing the same thing again. These settlements show when you have enough money, anything is legal.
Re:Big deal (Score:5, Informative)
35M is enough that someone internal is going to pay the price -- and by price, I mean leave his executive position and go to work for another tech company in high management for a similar paycheck where he'll repeat the process.
Re: (Score:2)
You can bet that whomever decided to do this either:
a. Had a legal team calculate the cost in fines and deduced they'd make more money than the fines would cost them by doing this.
or
b. (most likely) didn't check, didn't care, implemented the strategy and raked in large bonuses until the feds started asking questions at which time he/she either retired or moved on to another job. Ironically they likely will point to Infosys for the rest of their career and say "See how great they were doing right up until I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
35M is enough that someone internal is going to pay the price -- and by price, I mean leave his executive position and go to work for another tech company in high management for a similar paycheck where he'll repeat the process.
That depends on whether Infosys made a significant profit by this maneuver even taking the 35M into account.
If they made 500M (bullshit number just for example) in profits this way overall and had to pay 35M in penalties they'd say 'well done we came out ahead'.
Re: (Score:2)
You need some TERRORISM in there some where.
Much though I find their actions disgusting, and hope they die young, painfully and soon... sovereignty is something that, in the age of the internet, is willfully disobeyed and more frequently, is necessary as a result of a failure in government.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, if they did this to America, I would bet that they have pulled similar actions on other nations.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, if they're not Americans then they don't deserve a trial. In that case, a drone should be dispatched to off each one of them and their families.
By denying America the full economic benefit of having the work performed by Americans they are depriving our nation of monetary resources which could be used to further the fight against terrorism. In essence, they are providing support to the terrorists. It is reasonable to kill these sort of supporters of terrorism without trial.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they're not Americans then they don't deserve a trial. In that case, a drone should be dispatched to off each one of them and their families.
I hear Gitmo has some spare rooms.
Re: (Score:2)
But why would you convict a foreigner of treason? Treason is for citizens, not foreigners. And the best thing to do is to deny those ppl or any businesses associated with them, the ability to work in/with America.
Re: (Score:2)
why? These were foreign executives. These were not Americans. There was no treason here. They, and any businesses that they are connected with in ANY FASHION, should simply be denied business licences in America.
But what would happen to all the honest hard-working Americans working for them?
Oh right..
Re:Big deal (Score:5, Informative)
Whats worse is they even probably had a strategic team analyze how much they would get fined if they were caught, and decided it was worth the risk.
As long the US government gets their cut, the people who get screwed are the people who play by the rules. Fuck everything about big business and their collusion with the government.
Actually the US gov't doesn't like it either (Score:2)
The people winning are the corporations that get to drive down labor costs while using the United States' expansive military to make the world safe for their bank accounts.
Re:Big deal (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a pretty easy cure for all of this...
Just re-write the H1-B laws so that all H1-B workers must be paid 20% more than industry standard for the region or area the job is located in. That, or have a 20-40% premium on each worker's salary paid by the hiring company as an excise tax.
I bet that shit would stop cold right away.
Re:Big deal (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a pretty easy cure for all of this...
Just re-write the H1-B laws so that all H1-B workers must be paid 20% more than industry standard for the region or area the job is located in. That, or have a 20-40% premium on each worker's salary paid by the hiring company as an excise tax.
I bet that shit would stop cold right away.
It isn't enough. A lot of the draw of H1B is the lack of mobility. Let them freely change jobs and allow them to have a 1 year grace period between jobs if they've been in their first job for a year.
Re:Big deal (Score:5, Insightful)
I.e. change the incentives for H1B visa holders to rat out misbehaving employers, rather than being scared to say anything because they loose if they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Give H1B holders who blow the whistle on their employers violating the law (overworking them, or claiming and paying them as if it were a much lower skilled job that in reality is higher skilled, the employer just wanted to scare off US workers, etc.) either fast-path to a Green Card, double the pay (paid by fines) they would have earned, and/or freedom to move to a different employer for their stay.
I.e. change the incentives for H1B visa holders to rat out misbehaving employers, rather than being scared to say anything because they loose if they do.
That's like saying cops as a whole won't abuse power if we listen to the rare whistle blowers every now and then. When the system itself is abusable by design, 4 or 5 honest actors aren't going to fix that, you have to fix the system.
Re: (Score:2)
Give H1B holders who blow the whistle on their employers violating the law...
Getting foreigners to trust the United States that much isn't always possible [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Big deal (Score:2)
...
Yah, sure. Racists consider people of whatever race they dislike to be "unqualified". Age discriminators consider people who are older or younger than they prefer to be "unqualified". Those with unethical schemes consider people whose professional ethics preclude them from collaborating in schemes to, e.g. violate people's rights, initiate force or fraud, identity theft, extortion, privacy violation..., to be "u
Re: (Score:3)
What you are proposing will actually make the situation worse. H1B visas are relatively hard to get compared to the B1 visa that Infosys was abusing.
A B1 visa is easier to obtain as it is intended for short visits for things like negotiating a business contract, a marketing/sales visit and so on. It does NOT allow for the person to receive a salary from the US entity or to engage in any production work such as software development.
However, since H1B is difficult to get and since many contracts can be execut
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Labour laws, that's next to rampant unionism, that fixed minimum wages for all job types, that, OH MY GOD, communism ;D. Face it your screwed. Psychopathic corporations having be adding in the slap on the wrist fines as a normal cost oh high profit transactions for decades. Basically straight up organised crimes, where the criminals, those corporate executives know that they will not only get away with it without even a slap on the wrist but they keep their bonuses too boot and who get fined, why the share
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Letting the market work it out is only fair when all participants are on a level playing field. When the cost of living in some other country is much lower than ours, people from there are likely to be willing to work for wages that we would consider to be poverty scale. Exporting (or importing workers) those jobs may help the companies, but is screwing over the public, and forcing lower wages. Eventually, you'll end up with a public that is unable to afford the products that companies are sell, or the e
Re: (Score:2)
It is not as if they are forbidding Americans take those jobs.
Given the lower salaries paid to the H1-B's and that fact that Infosys, an *Indian* company, is procuring those visas to then turn around and low-ball bids on IT positions in the US?
They may as well be forbidding Americans from taking those jobs.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"Infosys had set aside $35 million to settle the case and cover legal costs. "
Meaning that they expect to discount the $35m by at least the cost of the legal expenses. So the people have to carry that burden... Surely it is time that such negotiations go 2 ways. i.e. "You want to argue the penalty, OK $45m..."
When (Score:5, Insightful)
When is the punishment going to be "No, you're out of business, you fraud. You don't play fair. You cost us jobs. You're GONE."
These bastards *made* more than 35 million off the scam. They're turning a profit off it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
yeah right - convert them all into bartenders.
that'll sure help things.
Re:When (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporations care just for the profits. If it is profitable for them to break laws, despite the current penalties involved, they will do so. Make it unprofitable and they are as law-abiding as the next guy.
You know, it might be kinda better than all that xenophobic bullshit about FOREIGNERS making profittttsss off you.... and trying to shut them down and costing even the legitimately employed folks of the company, their jobs. But I guess, racism and xenophobia is more popular...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Every employee at the company was complicit. If they lose their jobs over this sort of thing enough times, they'll learn to quit working for unethical assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there would. The void left by their departure would be filled. In the meanwhile, liquidate the crooks and give itr to the innocent local employeed to hold them over while the void is filled.
Re: (Score:2)
... by a company acting just as badly or worse. It's the 'car salesman' business model. Everyone hates car salesmen (with good reason) but so long as every salesman in every dealership acts just as cravenly, then there's no incentive to change the model.
Re: (Score:2)
Car salesmen are that way because we never ever prosecute them. If enough of them get fined out of business, they will stop.
Re: (Score:2)
After that, letting the rich steal from t
Re: (Score:2)
Those responsible for breaking the law should be the ones dealing with the consequences. A corporation may be legally culpable but I don't accept that it's the sensible target for this sort of crime, except as a last resort.
He's not arguing that we should let it go because it affects the innocent. The argument is that we should try to target the guilty more precisely.
For that matter, I haven't seen any credible evidence Infosys benefitted anywhere near than $35 million dollars *for this particular thing t
Re: (Score:2)
The only argument against revoking corporate status is that someone innocent will be hurt financially. This argument is just as valid for a human as it is for a corporation. So, we should either abolish any punishments that wou
Re: (Score:2)
If there is legitimite work that needs to be done in the US, it will still need to be done.
By another company, which can easily hire the people who were laid off when InfoSys or other such abusers were kicked out of the country.
Any job "losses" would be temporary at most.
Re: (Score:2)
They won't vote with their feet if it means they can never return. Especially if they can't take their ill gotten loot with them when they leave. If you let fear that they might leave trump the rule of law, then they become the new nobility and the we might as well just crown the richest one and call him 'your majesty'.
If they're gone, someone will need to fill the void here. That provides an opportunity. We need more opportunity here.
Look at the bright side (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything to get rid of those pesky American workers.
Re:Look at the bright side (Score:4, Insightful)
But why bother?
H1B is not all that hard to get.
You just lay off your current workers, then lie about there being no available US workers that meet the (carefully crafted) criteria.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
One word: Quota
There's a finite number of H1B's that are available every year, with a lottery-type system to see who gets them.
Re: (Score:2)
Except they don't. Where is this mysterious foreign worker that works for less money under the H-1B program? I've never met one, and I think I know why: The terms of obtaining them require that they are paid the same as anybody else working in that particular job.
Slashdot likes to have it both ways on this one: They claim that Americans are stupid, as marked by poor test scores below most of the developed world. Yet at the same time they insist that there's no need for H-1B visas because we have plenty of w
Re: (Score:2)
There's a billion ways around those rules. But if you work for a decent company you're unlikely to see too many of these lower-paid visa workers. The companies which hire them (like Infosys) tend to hire them by the planeload, and hire them almos
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is they are paid the lowest possible amount of money to stay legal and their wage stays stagnant. Companies know eventually the H1-B will move on or leave the country so they look at it long term. An American worker will eventually want more and more money the longer they stay. An H1-B knows they could be replaced by another so they may not be as aggressive is asking for more money. So they are paid a fair wage on paper but it never increases or increases very little (dollar raises, 50 cent raises
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that more American companies have been using this as a solid business model,.
FTFY
Is that Treble damages on top of fines? (Score:4, Insightful)
For each and every position which they did not higher industry median wage for they should pay 3 times the difference in wages + benefits (including pay-ins to the government) that were not disbursed. Further they should also have to pay some type of fine per position, per (year/quarter) that the violations occurred.
In other words, they should for SURE show a net loss for this bad behavior. If the behavior is egregious enough those in authority at the time should also face real jail time.
Anything less than that is a slap on the wrist and will not curb this behavior among companies who look at the balance sheet and conclude that the fines are a cost of doing business.
Re: (Score:2)
The nail was hit on the head in the second sentence.
However, it wouldn't be the CEO who goes to jail but some lowly middle management type.
The CEO will simply deny any knowledge that this was going, on and everyone down the chain of
command will insist they never told the CEO what was going on, and anyone who refuses to tow the
company line will be forced to accept an assignment in Russia. *cough*.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Missing Step 2 (Score:3, Insightful)
We're missing step #2, which is "And since you're defrauding the government among other customers, you're blacklisted from doing business with them again."
$35m isn't a drop in the bucket.
Re:Missing Step 2 (Score:5, Informative)
"35m isn't a drop in the bucket."
Yes it is.
Revenue US$ 7.39 billion (2013)
Operating income US$ 1.90 billion (2013)
Profit US$ 1.72 billion (2013)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - it *is* a drop in the bucket. Total Profit US - 1.72 billion. Let's presume that a significant portion of their profit is derived from overcharging for illegally underpaid Indian works on B-1 "Business visit" visas.
Losing $35,000,000 is a drop in the bucket when faced with the windfall of cash that they illegally made.
Re: (Score:2)
You're absolutely right....except you're assuming there is an actual finding/admission of guilt.
The article speaks of a "settlement" being announced. To my eyes, the probability of that settlement including an admission of culpability approaches zero.
Infosys will not be blacklisted, they'll mind their manners and volume for a bit, then quietly pick up where they left off on the contract pile.
And....allowing for that tiny percentage sliver, what if they do admit guilt and are barred from government contract
Re: (Score:2)
I have a better punishment: no visas of any kind for three years. No h1b, no b1, your CEO can't have a visa for his quarterly visit, nothing. The punishment should fit the crime.
Re: (Score:2)
While not truly at fault, perhaps the burden should be with the one who pays the bills to ensure compliance with US laws?
Plus, one never knows what the arrangements were.
Re: (Score:2)
H1B Scam (Score:5, Insightful)
Dump H1B. Instead of giving out Visa for foreign nationals, we should try to KEEP foreign graduates in this country - make it easier for foreign students graduating from US colleges to live and work in the US.
This is no brainer - many of the best and brightest from all over the world are already here in our universities.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And it would completely leave anyone who is not a student in the cold. I'm in the US on an H1B, working at a small tech startup. Since I joined the company, we have already doubled in size, hiring plenty more Americans. Are H1Bs sometimes abused? Yes, sure, it happens. On the other hand, I and other people like me are actively helping the US economy by creating new jobs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Since I joined the company, we have already doubled in size, hiring plenty more Americans. ... On the other hand, I and other people like me are actively helping the US economy by creating new jobs.
Do you honestly think there was nobody in the US who could have done your job? And that the growth of the company you work for is mainly because of your work product?
Arguing that H1Bs really help the US economy requires the answer to both to be "yes". Otherwise, you are simply taking a job that some US resident could have filled and claiming that you're helping him out by having it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They weren't really looking for someone to fill the position for 6 months. They determined they wanted to hire someone on the cheap, and so they came up with some impossible criteria for the job. When no one was able to meet those impossible criteria, they hired you.
And yes, a big chunk of why we've grown is because the work I do has shown our investors we're on the right track and have in return received a bunch of funding that has allowed us to create new jobs.
Since you're not American, you might not be familiar with this reference, but there's a group of statistics in baseball with names like VORP -- value over replacement player. For example, if someone hits ten home runs in a year, they don't ge
Re: (Score:3)
You assume a lot. First, the criteria isn't that some American could've done the job, that would've taken just about every possible job off the list. It that's you've made a *reasonable* effort to find one and you didn't. Even if there are plenty of Americans in other cities who don't want to move, or the same city but w
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
No, it means no American is able to fill the job for the ludicrous job requirements the company sets out. Either de
Re: (Score:3)
And I'm talking about the H1-B program, who's only purpose is to broaden the labor pool for employers, and thus depress wages and benefits of employees. That's what the H1-B program is for, and the "reasonable" stuff is just a sham.
Oh noes, they whine, no American will apply for our job! Well, have you tried offering more than $40k a year and overtime?
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like you're projecting your poutrage. Just because the post was trying to justify the unjustifiable, doesn't mean that anyone had a hard time understanding it.
Re: (Score:3)
They did so to save money, and it came at the cost of driving down the standard of living for everyone.
this bears repeating.
I have not had a cost-of-living raise in over 10 years. I'm lucky to even HAVE a job, at this point.
the living standard for us 'workers' has gone down by a LOT in the past 10 or even 20 yrs. it was once easy to walk into a silicon valley company and see a mix of faces. not anymore. the locals are 'too expensive' (read: they want a living wage). instead we have sold out our own peo
Re: (Score:2)
There's lots of competent programmers here. Why didn't they apply to your company? Why did you just get the incompetents and/or the lazy? Was it because you weren't willing to pay market rates for the competent, possibly? Assuming I'd been in the area and looking for a job, why wouldn't I have applied? (I can do entry-level coding questions.)
Re: (Score:2)
Further proof of the H1B visa myth (Score:5, Insightful)
There are both good and bad reasons to grant Visas to tech workers. We should not turn down genuine talent that wants to work here. Having bright minds emigrate, work, live, contribute, and integrate here is probably one of the biggest foundations of America's success.
What we don't want is a bunch of scum fucks importing slave-pay workers to save a buck. I say bring in the IT/tech talent, but on the condition they are paid competitive wages and compensation (And enforce that with some teeth!). You also need to make sure they have freedom and mobility so their sponsor company can't hold their visa over them as a form of extortion.
Granting guest workers MORE privileges and protections will ensure that they're less attractive to unscrupulous outfits looking to save money instead of hiring available domestic talent. Companies that genuinely need foreign talent will happily pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
We should not turn down genuine talent that wants to work here.
yes, yes we should turn they down!
when people who have been born here, raised here, paid their dues here and have a vested interest in what happens here (long-term) can't find a job, you better BELIEVE we should give them preference. big-time preference.
when our unemployment is reasonable again (low low single digit numbers) THEN its time to reconsider importing labor. but we have so many unemployed americans here, I find it disgusting that
Re: (Score:2)
Good people coming here to seek a better life, and making the country better as a whole.
this isn't the 1900's early era.
we're 'full up' right now. maybe come back later?
seriously, we can't keep our own people working. and you want to disenfranchise those who have been born, raised and educated here so that we 'fix' some other countrie's problems??
we have enough problems here of our own. we can't keep affording this endless 'fix the world' project. its bankrupting us. the middle class is disappearing an
Re: (Score:2)
That's why I would prefer to do away with H1-B entirely. Make it a bit easier to get a green card instead.
They really should DIAF (Score:2)
I am angered and saddened by what companies like Infosys have done to the US immigration system. I remember having to fight really hard to get my first H1B in the US because of those companies (I got my US higher ed paid by the NSF yet I'm not American, and I'm not a programmer).
After they have completely wrecked the H1B system they are now going to wreck the visitor visa system.
I am angry because they destroyed the reputation of the H1B system, one of the few legal ways to become a citizen. I am saddened
A lot of subcontinent firms gaming the system (Score:2, Insightful)
Infosys is not the only one gaming the system. My fortune 20 company is addicted to these "by the pound consultants" from the likes of Infosys/Tata/Berlasoft/you-know-who-you-are as well. There is zero effort put into sourcing local staff and the company pays substantial sums to these firms (who pocket half or more of the hourly rate) when they could just as easily get local employees for the same cost. Then there's the poor sods that are being raped by several levels of middle men and have to live 10 to
So don't make the H1-B such a pain (Score:2)
First there was the green card
Then it got slow, bloated and hard to get.
So they invented the H1-B which was quick and easy.
Then it got slow, bloated and hard to get.
So they invented the guest worker pass
continue....
Just fix the green card and the others are unnecessary. If someone is a net benefit to the country, there's no reason to limit their stay.
The US government provided the visas and the visa rules to Infosys. It looks to me that they took the hint. The US does not look like it 'wants' people on H1s
H1B != B-1 (Score:5, Informative)
I think people are confusing H1B (which have their own problems), with the B-1 visas that Infosys was caught abusing...
H1B are for employing people that live HERE to work HERE and are paid at a level to live HERE. B-1 visa are for people that live THERE, but are temporarily working HERE, but are paid to live THERE (which is generally much lower). For example, a person employed with the same company but lives say in India, that needs to come to the US to attend a meeting, or conference, or perhaps for a couple months for training or maybe even negotiate a contract in person would need a B-1 to get into the country (you technically can't do any of these things on a tourist visa).
The duration of an H1B is 3 years (extendable to 6 years), the duration of a B-1 is typically 6 months (extendable to 1 year). Think of the B-1 as a visitor visa to do technical visiting (there is a separate P-visa for an athlete or artist to make a performance in the US for money which is another type of visa).
The abuse that Infosys was doing is that they were submitting manufactured documentation for the B-1 that they were coming to the US to attend training, meetings or conference, but employing B-1 visa folks to work on long term projects. That is a big NO-NO because then you can paying foreign wages (instead of H1B equivalent wages) to people work on projects even though they are here, undercutting everyone (including H1Bs).
Infosys could have gotten the "death-sentence" (which some companies have gotten) which is no B-1 visas for a year, but they are of course big enough to avoid that and only need to pay $35M. This slap on the wrist is what to get upset about, not tangle this up with the separate H1B discussion. At least H1Bs are supposed to get paid a prevailing wage and their numbers are supposed to be limited, so at least on paper, it's reasonable. There are none of the similar statutory limitations on a B-1, so when you are abusing it, you are really going to town.
It's migra! It's migra! (Score:3)
Make all contract work illegal (Score:2, Troll)
So many problems will be addressed by that.
You're doing it wrong (Score:2)
These were short term visas. Require these 'visitors' sponsors to delivery proof of exit (plane tickets, etc) or deliver the 'visitors' to INS for deportation for overstaying. Failure by the sponsor results in daily fines to cover 3x costs of arrest and deportation, and equal punitive damages. Too many and these sponsors lose their privilege to use these visas, fire at least 3 years.
And after, say, 7 days overstay, fine the sponsors client where the visitor was working, which is registered in advance.
Re: (Score:2)
They already do. If you come in on a visa, you get a white I-94 card when you arrive, and you return this I-94 when you leave. It's how the DHS knows you don't overstay. If the airport authorities have collected the I-94 and you boarded the aircraft, they know you have left.
They will deport you if you overstay. The trouble is if someone overstays, since the US so far doesn't insist on making visitors wear a GPS tracker, you have to go and find them to deport them which can be quite difficult.
Re: You're doing it wrong (Score:2)
So make the sponsor either responsible or penalize them. Overstays could be considered 'working after expiration'. And if they aren't working for the sponsor, make the sponsor, liable for losing them.
Are you really really surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hint: I am in India, though I do not work for "Indian" company.
All my friends in TCS, Infosys, Wipro etc., went to US through B1 route if the duration was less than 2-3 months. B1 Visa explicitly forbids working, but is for meetings and stuff.
Yet they went on customer sites etc.,
They are even trained to give specific answers to Immigration and say a lot about meetings and stuff. Some are even booked as members on cheap conferences spaced 15-20 days apart so it all looks like the real deal.
These companies are unethical scum, and due to their bottom feeding attitude, they have spoilt the reputation of the "Indian software Engineer". The world now views the Indian software engineer as a low cost labour intensive guy fit for only data entry with the help of a spell checker.
That brush gets broadly applied to us product design software engineers doing real software work, and getting 2-3X the salary the bottom feeders pay.
Speaking of ethics, employees of these companies take their Earned or Paid leave, and then come to office, so that do not lose out the govt sop of leave travel allowance. But any actual leave is hard to come by unless you are on bench.
During their foreign stints, they were forced to handover any allowance in lue of extra working hours given to them by the employer(some US employers used to give sops) to their parent company.
If you are hiring a cheap bottom feeder from India, all I can say is "All the best". The low quality work will blow up in your face 1-2 years from now, and no amount of patchwork will fix it.
Then you will go to a bar after your layoff and lament how you only get cheap unskilled monkeys from India. But the fact is you are the retard who went bottom feeding and found only slime.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are hiring a cheap bottom feeder from India, all I can say is "All the best". The low quality work will blow up in your face 1-2 years from now, and no amount of patchwork will fix it. Then you will go to a bar after your layoff and lament how you only get cheap unskilled monkeys from India. But the fact is you are the retard who went bottom feeding and found only slime.
The people who hire the "cheap bottom feeder from India" won't be laid off, they are the ones doing the layoffs. The people mandating that we use the Indian slave labor are 2 levels below CEO. CEO->CTO->Director. Anyone below that has no choice, besides a mass exodus.
They should have been booted (Score:2)
Competitors are missing a GOLDEN opportunity (Score:2)
TCODB (Score:3)
Major Federal violations such as this should _start_ at 10% of the total corporations' gross profits encompassing the entire time span of the violation, rapidly rising with discovery of any willful cover-up.
Re: (Score:3)
They are not fining the workers, they are fining the company that brought them in illegally.
The imported employees get spun off and transferred around so fast that the government loses track of them.
Probably find dozens of them working on Obamacare web site right now.
Re: (Score:2)
The imported employees get spun off and transferred around so fast that the government loses track of them.
Imagine a day when our total surveillance is applied to something useful like flagging people who've overstayed their visas and looking for patterns of abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Change the law to limit the number of H-1B visas that a company may sponsor to not more than 10% of their worker base in the same field (e.g. percentage is applied to each type of job). Then limit the B-1 visas to a maximum of 63 days within the past 365 days (plus 2 travel days for each entry/exit). And while at it, allow any H-1B holder (the person) to change employer when they or the employer is willing to pay all the visa costs to the sponsor that paid them.
Re: (Score:2)
The DHS oversees the Visa program along with the State Department.
more info Here. [state.gov]