Microsoft Seeks Trump Order Exemption for Workers With Visas (bloomberg.com) 437
Microsoft is asking U.S. officials to grant exceptions for law-abiding, visa-holding workers and students from President Donald Trump's immigration order, channeling the outrage expressed by many in the technology industry with a proposed solution. From a report: Such individuals are low-risk -- having already undergone a rigorous vetting process -- and face immediate hardship as a result of last week's order, Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith said in a letter Thursday to the secretaries of State and Homeland Security. Smith said he believes the two officials are empowered to take the necessary steps to allow certain people entry into the country. The exemptions sought would cover workers with visas sponsored by U.S.-based companies and students with ones obtained via a U.S.-based school.
a little pressure (Score:2)
Microsoft engineers low risk ? (Score:3)
Look at what they did to the USS Yorktown [gcn.com]!
Microsoft wants to modify /etc/hosts.deny (Score:5, Funny)
ALL: ALL
Please don't go groveling to him (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what he wants. It's what he needs to feel important and the more you give into it, the more he's going to keep doing these stupid, stupid things.
This isn't about getting more Americans employed. It's about punishing people who wouldn't kowtow to him and his corrupt cronies. It's about hurting those he thinks need to be hurt.
He doesn't understand the world or how it works. He couldn't care less about you or I or how well we are employed. Neither can anyone else in his administration. Don't fool yourself into thinking that is a good thing. It's not. It's only going to hurt us more and more each day it goes on. It's going to hurt the prestige of the nation. It's going to hurt the economic prospects going forward. It's going to affect each and everyone of us in subtle and not so subtle ways. It already has.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's what he wants. It's what he needs to feel important and the more you give into it, the more he's going to keep doing these stupid, stupid things.
Boy, you really don't like Bill Gates!
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to affect each and everyone of us in subtle and not so subtle ways. It already has.
This statement is like Astrology: so vague that it applies to everything.
Would you mind elaborating on your theme that it's going to hurt us? I'm always open to the possibility that I'm missing something (even something painfully obvious), but I like the idea of gutting the entire H1B Visa program.
Re: (Score:2)
Because trade isn't solely about making the rich richer.
It's also about creating ties at the human level. The level where people matter and count. See? Immigration is the best way to safeguard a nation against attack. Who wants to attack their own? Those nations that restrict their immigration don't have that protection, they don't have the reasons to not do stupid things and wage war against their neighbors.
By having this program, we get some pretty smart people to come here and start families. We get them
Re: (Score:2)
Wow..just...wow.
When did you come up with this little ditty..and do you actually believe that....?
Re: (Score:2)
It's also about creating ties at the human level. The level where people matter and count.
Save your bleeding-heart bullshit and point out that trade makes the poor richer [slashdot.org].
Re:Please don't go groveling to him (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump is openly picking individual winners and losers in the business world. By naming specific companies like Boeing and GM, instead of setting more generic industry wide rules, Trump's action is the very definition of crony capitalism. Yes, there are procurement problems in the defense industry, but why attack the F35 program and not the littoral combat ship (LCS) program.
Perhaps Trump likes to mouth off with only a superficial knowledges of whatever he happens to hear on the cable news, or perhaps people around him are using inside knowledge to capitalize on the subsequent market valuation of those publicly traded companies.
Slowly but surely, Trump's actions will diminish US's worldwide competitiveness and standing, much like Obama's inactions. However, Obama does not have a history of predatorial financial and gender behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
He couldn't care less about you or I or how well we are employed. Neither can anyone else in his administration. Don't fool yourself into thinking that is a good thing. It's not. It's only going to hurt us more and more each day it goes on. It's going to hurt the prestige of the nation. It's going to hurt the economic prospects going forward. It's going to affect each and everyone of us in subtle and not so subtle ways. It already has.
My employers solution to this issue:
Fire all of the US staff and massively expand the branch in India. My last day is Feb 7th after 13 years on the job. Thanx Don!
Re: (Score:3)
That's what he wants. It's what he needs to feel important and the more you give into it, the more he's going to keep doing these stupid, stupid things.
Here is a guess, you haven't actually read the order have you?
The order specifically says that the various departments involved may grant exceptions to the general rule as they see fit. Meaning Trump said "Don't call me, do what you have to do." Which is pretty much the opposite of the micromanager you describe Trump to be. He will likely never know or care that one of his underlings has granted or refused Microsoft their wish.
So your little fit here about Trump really is more about your perceptions o
Faustian bargain (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
Probably the majority of people who work on visas "actively travel to their homelands" to visit family, or because their job involves actually interacting in their homeland. Microsoft also sells internationalized products, so they have a great need for native language speakers pretty much world wide.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I highly doubt that Microsoft has many non-replacable workers from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia in their employ that are actively traveling to their homelands. I also doubt they are going out of their way to hire refugees from these countries. If these people like their jobs then let them become citizens.
Everyone's replaceable.
But, you'd still try and stand by and help your co-workers.
One Law For All (Score:2)
Or no law at all. Make up your mind or we will make it up for you.
Nice try (Score:3, Insightful)
>> Such individuals are low-risk --
Nice deflection attempt by Microsoft, but Its not about terrorism, its about taking jerbs from US workers.
Re: (Score:3)
Stop sucking at interviews and you'll get one.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely. The countries are: Libya, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia. The total sum of US visa workers from those countries is probably very low. Probably most of them are hired *because* they came from those countries. They probably do something specific to that country, like translation, marketing, distribution, or legal, and as such can't readily be replaced by an American worker.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably most of them are hired *because* they came from those countries.
Most of the Iranians I know in Silicon Valley were refugees from the 1978 Iranian Revolution. They speak fluent English and do the jobs that any American can do.
Gotta Think That.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Applying the order to those already in possession of visas and green cards sure looks like the DHS bureaucracy doing a mini-rebellion by applying the EO to its most extreme levels, rather than using good legal reasoning based on due process. It's clear from the text of the EO that they were to implement it "to the extent allowed by law" which does not permit abuse of discretion. Sometimes people in agencies will cynically implement an order in a way as to inconvenience those it isn't intended to cover to generate outrage.
Re: (Score:2)
Applying the order to those already in possession of visas and green cards sure looks like the DHS bureaucracy doing a mini-rebellion by applying the EO to its most extreme levels, rather than using good legal reasoning based on due process. It's clear from the text of the EO that they were to implement it "to the extent allowed by law" which does not permit abuse of discretion. Sometimes people in agencies will cynically implement an order in a way as to inconvenience those it isn't intended to cover to generate outrage.
Quite right. It's all the agencies' fault. The buck doesn't stop in the Oval Office at all.
Senior executives caught up in the mess (Score:5, Informative)
I heard yesterday about a senior executive at Oracle who regularly travels internationally to places like China for meetings with suppliers. He manages about 500 people. He's now stuck in the country and unable to do a large part of his job because he happened to be born in Iran. "Make America Great Again" my ass.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you have a name? A link to an article? It's believable, I just want to show this to some people.
I know what they'll try and get an exception for (Score:3)
They want to get an exception for the new $130,000 minimum wage for H1B workers.
Re: (Score:2)
"The exemptions sought would cover workers with visas sponsored by U.S.-based companies and students with ones obtained via a U.S.-based school."
It is right in the summary....
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"The exemptions sought would cover workers with visas sponsored by U.S.-based companies"
It is indeed right in the summary... did you not know that H1Bs are visas for workers sponsored by U.S. Based companies?
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously. 1000 square foot places in NYC (in nice areas) are an expensive, close to unaffordable, luxury.
Re:Sure, if they are H-1B.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Here is spacious NYC 550 square feet is a decent sized one bedroom.
My Silicon Valley studio apartment is only 475 square feet. Could be worse. A relative bought a $1M+ five-bedroom house in Gilroy that had a wet bar larger than my kitchen and a kitchen larger than my apartment. Very obscene. Although the mountain lion watching the BBQ from the other side of a 20-foot-tall wired fence was very cool.
Re: (Score:2)
Started as plausible, finished as crazy. Loved it.
Re:Sure, if they are H-1B.... (Score:4, Informative)
Started as plausible, finished as crazy. Loved it.
What's crazy?
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-search/Gilroy_CA/beds-5-5 [realtor.com]
Re: (Score:2)
wow, I bought 12 acres for $10k but im not in Cal.
comparisons (Score:2)
You just have to know how to shop...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I Live Under A Rock (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
you actually fall for that tripe bullshit!?!?!?!
They've been caught again and again because they're not even good liars. But sure - whatever. Everything you hear/read is true.
Re:They don't get it. (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking as someone who has spent thousands of dollars in legal assistance getting the appropriate visa in place allowing me to work in the US (but luckily am not from one of the countries in the executive order)... go fuck yourself. This isn't about American jobs, its about screwing over people you don't like and trying to win political points with morons.
People have spent years getting those visas. People may have even been living the in US for decades. This is not a moratorium on new visas, this is retroactively screwing people who have followed the process to get into the US legally.
Re:They don't get it. (Score:5, Interesting)
A friend of a friend on Facebook is Iranian by birth. She has lived 20+ years in Australia and is an Australian citizen. She has also previously lived 5+ years in the UK and is now in the middle of a 5+ year stint in the US. She does not have a green card but is working in the US under a valid US work visa (but I don't know which class). She has had to cancel 5 international business trips in the short term because as per Trump if she leaves the US the immigration lawyers at her work have said as a best guess that she won't be able to re-enter.
How's that for fucking over your friends.
Blame thrower (Score:2, Insightful)
A friend of a friend on Facebook is Iranian by birth. She has lived 20+ years in Australia and is an Australian citizen. She has also previously lived 5+ years in the UK and is now in the middle of a 5+ year stint in the US. She does not have a green card but is working in the US under a valid US work visa (but I don't know which class). She has had to cancel 5 international business trips in the short term because as per Trump if she leaves the US the immigration lawyers at her work have said as a best guess that she won't be able to re-enter.
How's that for fucking over your friends.
Or maybe, just maybe, the Iranian government screwed her over?
Re:Blame thrower (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe, just maybe, the Iranian government screwed her over?
By your logic anyone who is Iranian by birth* is tainted and thus should be treated with distrust, and there no is manner by which they can prove their humanity.
Pissing off innocent people is not a good way to win hearts and minds and plays directly into the hands of those who would be easily radicalized. Thus making the global terror situation worse than it is now.
*Is there a lower age limit by which an Iranian is so tainted? Or in your mind does terrorism begin at conception?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Cancel 5 trips over the next 90 days? For an Australian citizen? Based on a nebulous fear?
Smells fishy to me dude. I'd check your sources on that one.
Re: (Score:2)
Cancel 5 trips over the next 90 days? For an Australian citizen? Based on a nebulous fear?
Smells fishy to me dude. I'd check your sources on that one.
Do you mean like this direct quote that I just copied from FB????? The one I paraphrased above???? That one???
Immigration lawyers have said that if I fly overseas I will not be allowed to board a flight back to the US. No one born in Iran (or the 6 other countries listed on the EO) can enter unless they have an American passport or greencard (contentious). 20+ years living in Australia, 5+ years in UK and US, an Aussie passport, a visa to work here.. all irrelevant because of my country of birth. Tomorrow's flight cancelled, 4 other trips over the next 90 days postponed. It's a sad time to be in America.
Re:They don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Aww, she can't leave the country for a few months.
You really can't see past your nose can you. She is working in the US. Cancelling those BUSINESS trips causes financial harm to a US company. That screws over not just her but her fellow employees that ARE US Citizens. You know .. the sort of person you are, but with more common sense.
Re:They don't get it. (Score:4)
Re:They don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
And if she had a stamp in her passport from Israel, she would be executed upon entry into Iran (actually factually true).
True but irrelevant.
Sorry she comes from a shithole, but the "ban" is Trump's attempt to force those countries to vet the people getting visas so we can tell they are not terrorists coming to kill US citizens.
She already has the Visa. She has been vetted. She is already here.
Once those countries comply and allow proper vetting, they get taken off the list.
Umm .. you do realize that it is the US that is doing the vetting don't you? Do you?
They refuse to comply, the ban will be extended past the original 120 days. As soon as those idiots stop thinking coming to the US to kill us is a good idea, they will be treated better. Until then, I don't really care how long they are banned.
It's the banning the people who are coming here with good intentions that is the issue. But you seem hung up on THE EVIL TERRORISTS THAT LURK IN EVERY SHADOW.
When did it become evil to even TRY to protect US citizens from foreign terrorist? You realize you are arguing to benefit ISIS?
How the fuck is screwing over a person who has been vetted already has a visa protecting the US from terrorists? If anything it plays directly in to the easily radicalized by saying "look at how bad the US treats its friends. The US is obviously evil and doesn't want to give anyone else a fair chance".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get it either. (Score:2, Informative)
Speaking as someone who has spent thousands of dollars in legal assistance getting the appropriate visa in place allowing me to work in the US (but luckily am not from one of the countries in the executive order)... go fuck yourself. This isn't about American jobs, its about screwing over people you don't like and trying to win political points with morons.
People have spent years getting those visas. People may have even been living the in US for decades. This is not a moratorium on new visas, this is retroactively screwing people who have followed the process to get into the US legally.
I don't get it either.
The order does not affect people from other countries, it doesn't affect people from your country, and it specifically doesn't affect *you*.
It doesn't affect 87% of all Muslims, so it isn't a ban, and it affects the 10% Christian populations of those countries and other religions, so it isn't a religious thing.
And the DHS has further clarified [redstate.com] the executive order by saying that it doesn't affect green-card holders.
Furthermore, many countries don't allow immigration at all, and many oth
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing terrible would have happened if Trump announced 80 days from now new rules to apply to new visa applicants. Instead we got an unexplained ban designed to throw red meat for Trump's rabid base.
Re:I don't get it either. (Score:5, Informative)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it does. Who gives a crap about whether someone has a green card or not? There's no meaningful difference between a green card holder and an H1-B visa holder in terms of the impact on those people and their families when they suddenly are unable to return to their homes, to their families in the United States, etc. because of this idiotic and ill-conceived ban.
By that same logic logic, I have no right to complain when a terrorist takes a car and drives over hundreds of people, because I use a car to drive to work....
There's a huge difference between not allowing a bunch of homeless refugees to permanently come to the U.S. (as President Obama did) and not allowing technology professionals who already live in the U.S. to leave the country on business trips and be able to get back in (as President Trump did).
President Obama used the law to limit the rate of refugee entry into the country, and only refugee entry. He did not cancel existing visas. He did not ban people who had a preexisting legal right to enter the U.S. That's the difference. And it's an important difference that has a real-world impact on real people's lives.
Re:I don't get it either. (Score:5, Insightful)
Obama banned immigration from Cuba, and Carter banned immigration from Iran with no fanfare.
The "no fanfare" bit - was that because Obama and Carter were Democrat? Or was there some other difference(*) that no one has noticed?
First, there were some objections to the Obama action, but admittedly nothing like Trump. But the comparison is disingenuous, because what Obama did was end the "wet-foot dry-foot policy" that allowed Cubans who reached the US to get entry WITHOUT A VISA to request asylum. Trump, on the other hand, has banned people WITH VISAS, some of whom went through vetting processes for months or years.
In the equivalent case to Cuban refugees requesting asylum, the Cuban refugees were allowed entry with NO VETTING. In Trump's case, the vetting process for most refugees who now HAD VISAS has taken about TWO YEARS, including approvals from multiple security agencies.
As for Carter, we had an active hostage situation where diplomats from the US were being held by a foreign government. And even then, Carter did NOT CANCEL VISAS that had already been granted. He stopped new visa approvals and in some cases required recent Iranian immigrants to undergo additional screening upon arrival. There was no automatic cancellation of approved visas.
I've used this analogy before, but to take this into a different context, if Obama and Carter were running a business, what they effectively did was stop new applications for jobs, and perhaps require a bit of additional verification for those already hired. The equivalent for Trump in terms of many refugees would be if you were negotiating with a business for a new job for 2 years, underwent significant interviews for security clearances, had medical testing, etc., and you'd been approved for everything, bought your plane tickets to relocate, made arrangements for a new home where the company was... and then suddenly your hiring contract was summarily rescinded while you were in transit.
Add in the fact that this is a temporary ban
Yeah, a lot of people keep saying that as if it's some sort of minor inconvenience. Setting aside that some refugees are applying for such status while in FEAR for their lives, you also have all sorts of logistical issues that were simply tossed aside here. Many of the approvals for security or medical or whatever tests are done with a specific timeline in mind, and many of them expire over a period of a few months, essentially putting these people "back to the drawing board" after months or years. And what about all the refugee organizations in the U.S. who organized apartments and places to live for these people, etc.? There a hundreds of other little details that make this a MAJOR disruption within a system... not just a minor "temporary" inconvenience.
Can someone explain how this is anything to get worked up over?
Here's are a couple things, besides issues I already brought up above:
(1) What are Trump's actual problems with the vetting system right now? What are his suggestions for improvement? Is there ANYTHING specific he can point to that he intends to change about the vetting? If there were some major flaw in the two-year multiple-agency process for refugee approval we have now, I'd be right on board with you in saying, "Let's slow it down and see how to fix it." But Trump hasn't actually identified anything in our screening procedures he thinks are flawed or need reform. So why the sudden rush into this outright ban, disrupting a system that he doesn't have any specific criticisms of?... other than for the political capital with his supporters?
(2) If this REALLY were about fear of terrorism and proper "vetting," why are countries that actually have PRODUCED terrorists (e.g., Saudi Arabia) not on this list? If it were really so dire that we needed to cancel travel plans for thousands and thousands of people over the next few months, why aren't we looking int
Re: (Score:3)
I don't get it either.
The order does not affect people from other countries, it doesn't affect people from your country, and it specifically doesn't affect *you*.
To paraphrase a famous quote:
First they came for the Jews, and then some libtard do-gooder starts complaining so I said what are you whining about? You're not a Jew, you'll be fine!
Re: (Score:2)
One of the huge problems with the US immigration system is this notion of rejecting people at the border. By the time someone gets to the border all the vetting should have already happened.
Unfortunately that is the way of immigration officials the world over and not just the USA. They have the absolute power to allow you to enter or stop you dead in your tracks.
Re:They don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Speaking as someone who has spent thousands of dollars in legal assistance getting the appropriate visa in place allowing me to work in the US... go fuck yourself.
Why do you think your ability to work in the US should be prioritized over interests of US citizens and US tech workers? Do you think USA could have a legitimate right to turn you away for any reason whatsoever, no matter how misguided such reason might be?
I do not live or work in US, so this is neutral third-party question.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as someone who has spent thousands of dollars in legal assistance getting the appropriate visa in place allowing me to work in the US (but luckily am not from one of the countries in the executive order)... go fuck yourself. This isn't about American jobs, its about screwing over people you don't like and trying to win political points with morons.
People have spent years getting those visas. People may have even been living the in US for decades. This is not a moratorium on new visas, this is retroactively screwing people who have followed the process to get into the US legally.
It could actually both be about American jobs and screwing over people you don't like to win political points. There's nothing about one that prevents the other.
You might want to ramp your hysterical reaction down a notch or two. No legal residents are being kicked out. Some who left the country are having trouble getting back in, but nobody here is being kicked out. I read recently about a guy who has lived in the US for over 20 years and his children are young adults and naturalized citizens. Fo
Re: (Score:2)
So... why aren't they "Americans" by now?
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.npr.org/2017/01/12/... [npr.org]
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-... [vox.com]
Re: (Score:3)
This just proves that Microsoft just doesn't get it. The whole point of Trump's administration is to make American companies hire American workers. Too bad if outsourced workers are cheaper, AMERICANS NEED JOBS!
And you wonder why they'd rather hire a "terrorist" over you. Entitlement much?
Re:They don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well to be fair, what's the point of having a country at all if it doesn't entitle you to anything? Just somewhere to throw away your taxes in the hope that you'll get drafted for a war you don't wanna fight?
Re: (Score:3)
PLEASE post under a real username...so someone can/will mod you up!!!
I couldn't have put it any better.
Yes...if you are a US citizen, you *SHOULD* have first preference to a job in your own country.
Re: (Score:2)
Well to be fair, what's the point of having a country at all if it doesn't entitle you to anything? Just somewhere to throw away your taxes in the hope that you'll get drafted for a war you don't wanna fight?
The president doesn't pay taxes.
An immigrant probably pays more taxes, and fights and dies for America.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not entitlement because its not a level playing field.
in real money terms, the living costs for foreign workers, and their families in their own country is WAY cheaper than what US citizens and their families in the US need to just get by.
Re: (Score:2)
AMERICANS NEED JOBS!
Which is exactly what you get when foreign engineering and design firms which operate from nations with permissive immigration for STEM talent outsource their low-wage manual labor jobs here for manufacture. What? You want those corporations and their profits to stay here? Forget that, you just walled off the vast international source of talent from domestic high-tech companies which need access to succeed.
Ceteris paribus, the most successful companies are those with the best access to resources, not tho
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's bullshit, though. It doesn't matter if you're an American either, you have to give up your constitutional liberty and abandon all integrity in your interpretation of the rule of law unless you can convince yourself that doing whatever Trump tells you, in the name of God, is the only way to save your eternal soul.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay if you can not prove you are a minimum 25% Native American then Please Return to Your Own Homeland.
By Strict Standards Mexicans have more of a right than most Texans do
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
America is for Native Americans
If you're not a Native American, KINDLY GET OUT
doesn't matter if you're smart, honest, well behaved, a perfect employee or even run your own company, GET OUT, THANK YOU. ENJOY YOUR OWN HOMELAND
FTFY
Re:They don't get it. (Score:5, Informative)
The workers MS bring in AREN'T cheaper, they are paid at the same rate as US workers or in most cases higher.
But you can't hire Americans and ask them to work 80+ hours a week under the threat of deportation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Americans need to finish their schools to qualify for these jobs too.
New factory jobs require a college degree. Something that most Trump voters don't possess.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/education/edlife/factory-workers-college-degree-apprenticeships.html [nytimes.com]
Somehow i feel most of the Trump voters would rather get a job in a car factory.
From the various articles of I've read, the ideal Trump voter is someone who wants a 1980's manufacturing job that doesn't require a high school diploma. Those jobs are not coming back.
Re: (Score:2)
U can be sure american youngsters would gladly take the STEM education if the long term ROI for them would be worth it and they wouldn't be under treat to be replaced with foreign slaves. It is just a matter of smart investment.
That's unlikely. Most American youngsters and their parents are interested in the majors that are money makers today. They're not going to look at long-term studies to see if a job will still exist after four years of schooling or 30+ years from now. Too many young Americans stop learning after leaving school, fail to change when the job market changes, and find themselves stuck in life — just like their parents.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:An immigrant CEO (Score:5, Funny)
How qualified would Eric Trump be if his last name wasn't Trump?
He has terrific qualifications. Everybody agrees, he has fantastic qualifications. So there's no problem with his qualifications, believe me.
Re: (Score:2)
They should be subject to the 150,000$ a year if they want to keep them... after all there are only 2 arguments that could be made..
1) They wanted cheap labor and hired a foreign worker instead of an american because they could pay them less.
2) They found a highly skilled foreigner that has a unmatched skill set they could find in america.
Both problems are solved with paying that worker 150,000$ a year... They wont keep around someone at that pay rate that isn't worth it. and if they are that good... they
Re: (Score:2)
Or they only have offices in areas where American workers don't want to relocate to, whereas imported labor will agree to work anywhere in the country.
Re: (Score:2)
Or they only have offices in areas where American workers don't want to relocate to, whereas imported labor will agree to work anywhere in the country.
Given the field we're talking about here, and the ability for tech workers within that field to work remotely (as in wherever they want to call home), that whole office locale excuse is a rather weak one.
Hell, it's 2017. Companies don't have much of an excuse to not support remote work regardless of the field.
Re:It's not about risk... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know a lot of people that don't want to telecommute. There's value on having your team nearby and having the ability to work together in person.
Re:It's not about risk... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Result 1: American company hires more American workers, pays them good wages, everybody lives happily ever after.
Result 2: American company hires more American workers, pays them good wages, costs go up, company can't compete with Chinese competitor, shuts down, eliminates many more jobs than H-1Bs.
Result 3: American company open foreign campus, shuts down American campus, eliminates many more jobs than H-1Bs.
Things like H-1Bs and outsourcing and illegal immigration are all just symptoms of wealth imbalance
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing how much companies like Microsoft, Apple and Google etc pay H1Bs, I would bet reasonably heavily that all of these people already earn over $150k.
Microsoft, Apple and Google (and all the other big tech companies) are not the ones you care about re problem 1 - that's infosys and tata. They're dealing with problem 2, and already applying your solution.
What Microsoft is saying is "uhhh, we have guys that do awesome work who are from Iran/Syria/Somalia/..., we need them to carry on doing that awesome w
Re:It's not about risk... (Score:5, Informative)
If we pull Men's and Boys's Cotton Shorts and Trousers manufacture to American factories from China, a few things will happen depending on a few factors.
If we pay the factory workers more than $18/hr, we'll lose American jobs. There will be fewer American jobs in total. This is because the ability of Americans to buy MBCST decreases thanks to the price increasing. As the wage increases, the price increases; and as the price increases, fewer factory jobs are created and more infrastructure jobs (shipping, retail, etc.) are lost.
If we pay the factory workers less than $18/hr, we'll gain total American jobs for the same reason.
The more we pay the American factory workers, the greater the increase in total hours Americans must work to pay for MBCST. That is to say: Americans become poorer. The median wage today is $27/hr, and the average cost of a pair of MBCST is 0.55 labor hours at $27/hr. If we pay the factory workers $21/hr, then the average cost to the median American income is 1.87 hours; and if we pay them $8.25/hr (minimum wage), the average cost is 0.93 hours.
This works inversely for the factory workers themselves: the less we pay them, the poorer they are. That should be obvious; the only thing worth indicating here is that raising factory worker pay takes the same American monetary spending power (amount of dollars spendable) and concentrates it into fewer hands (number of workers receiving that money). At current, a $21/hr worker pays 0.71 hours for a pair of MBCST; if they were made by $21/hr factory workers, the factory workers would pay 2.4 hours per pair. Likewise, an $8.25/hr worker pays 1.81 hours today for a pair of MBCST; if we pay the factory workers $8.25/hr, then they will pay 3.03 hours per pair.
Of final note: it costs under $1,300 to import a 40-foot shipping container from China, which carries 20,000 pairs of trousers. That's 6.5 cents per pair. The average cost of the trousers at import is $6.12; the average retail price is $14.97. Cashiers perform 998 scans per hour on average--at minimum wage, 0.83 cents per item. Nearly half the ultimate cost of trousers is shipping; and in general the businesses make around a 10% overall profit margin (gross margins are higher than real profit margins because they exclude the cost of running the business itself), so about 90% of the price is generally the actual cost. That means we're not going to save a damned thing on shipping over the water.
Re: (Score:3)
The CEO's are not getting that money.
The goal of a corporation is to raise the share price. No else. IT MUST GO UP every quarter FOREVER or the CEO is fired. Sure as CHina grows they buy more but you need to keep cutting costs in commodities like IT and workers to make Wall Street happy
Re:It's not about risk... (Score:4, Insightful)
Chinese factories use the thinnest cheapest fabrics they can.
Chinese factories use exactly what they're told to. Manufacturing in China, and using literally cheap ass fabric, are both ways that the cost is reduced. Unrelated ways. China would happily use better fabric, they don't care, they just charge the US company appropriately. There's no reason to think the US company would pay for better fabric just because i stuff is made here.
Re: (Score:2)
This is about Micro$oft short changing American citizens on jobs by importing and hiring cheaper labor from other countries. Simple as that.
Loathe as I am to feed an AC troll, I suspect that MS get their foreign-born workforce from more locations than just the seven countries banned by Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft's population (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, how many employees does Microsoft have from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia and Libya? I thought that most of their foreign employees would be people from Europe, China and India, who are untouched by this order (which applies only from the above countries)
Re: (Score:2)
There are not a lot of IT jobs in Yemen, so tech workers from there almost always work outside of their home country.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft's population (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Obama's wasn't retroactive.
Yeah, big scary foreign word. It means it didn't apply to people who already had visas.
Re:Microsoft's population (Score:5, Informative)
Obama's ban was a targeted response to a specific threat, where two Iraqi nationals were caught attempting to send money, explosives, and weapons to Al-Qaida. That ban was enacted in order to review how the vetting process allowed those individuals into the country.
Regardless, I don't see Microsoft being "outraged". They are making a specific request for providing exemptions to those who have been vetted, and the executive order allows exemptions to be granted at the discretion of administration officials.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Microsoft is already great. (Score:5, Informative)
Green cards are not visas. The two are completely unrelated.
A green card is a non-expiring, permanent resident work permit. It confers a right to permanent residency within the U.S., and provides a path to citizenship.
A visa provides temporary entry into the U.S. for various purposes, including tourism, work, education, etc. You've probably heard of some of the work visas, such as H-1B, H-2B, L-1A, L-1B, R-1, etc. There are also specific types of student visas, such as F-1, J-1, and M-1. Some visas allow you to leave and reenter the country, e.g. F-1 and J-1. Some allow you to work, e.g. H*, L*, R*, and J-1. And some just let you be a tourist, e.g. B-1, B-2, etc.
Allowing green card holders to come back to the U.S. is basically unavoidable. They're legal residents of the United States with homes, families, etc. That's also true for many of the visa types, but those folks are currently screwed, which is nothing short of appalling. And it is particularly heinous for students whose schools have a January term (and who thus took the month of January as an extended vacation) who are now trapped outside the country, unable to return to school, potentially losing scholarships, etc., all because our President doesn't know the difference between a green card, a visa, and refugee status admission.
Re:Microsoft is already great. (Score:5, Insightful)
It is truly astonishing the extent to which this type of uncertainty about your country's own laws has become normalised - and so quickly too. In a stable Democracy, the stability of law is incredibly important. Knowing what you are, and are not, permitted to do - and being able to have enormous confidence that tomorrow the situation will be unchanged - is fundamental. And yet, here is the United States, in which the population is actually in the position of not knowing whether or not a particular person is permitted into their country - despite their being in possession of their "papers".
The whole pantomime has several different aims. Firstly we have Trump separating his supporters from his foes, and dealing with these discovered enemies swiftly. Secondly, the presidential decree itself, which is deliberately over-reached, so that it may be dialled back to the position they really want, and be made to appear reasonable. And of course, thirdly, to create the situation described above. To create uncertainty in the law itself, and thus keep a population fearful of what they might not be allowed to do tomorrow. Controlling a population is much easier if they're never quite sure of what their rights are.
Though the US has a deeply unhealthy relationship with firearms, it might yet pull itself out of this apparent nose-dive into a form of corporate totalitarianism by forming a decent citizens army, and dealing with these people in the only way that they deserve.
Good luck.
Re: (Score:2)
Commenting to undo an erroneous mod...but fuck you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah because its so easy to hire qualified tech people these days, particularly in the major tech hubs where the unemployment rate for tech workers is incredibly low.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Never mind that the chance an American will be killed by a foreign-born refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion.
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-the-risk-of-being-killed-by-a-foreign-terrorist-trump-ban2017-1 [businessinsider.com]
Re:Sure, MS! What Risks? (Score:4, Insightful)
How much do those odds mean to the victims and their families of the WTC, San Bernadino, the Boston Marathon attacks, and others?
Shit happens. You're more likely to die from obesity (30,000 people per year), lightning strikes (10,000 people per year) or from being attacked by a shark (five people per year).
https://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/20-things-that-kill-more-people-than-sharks-every [buzzfeed.com]