H-1B visa programme faces onslaught of Congressional bills

March 9, 2017

Washington, Mar 9: With the Trump administration seriously mulling H-1B visa reforms, at least half a dozen bills have been tabled in the US House of Representatives and the Senate, contending that the programme that is popular among Indian IT firms eats into American jobs.

visaAuthors of all these bills from both the Republican and the Democratic parties believe that H-1B work visas, which are highly popular among Indian techies and Indian IT companies, tend to replace American workers.

Even though this argument is disputed by research scholars, economists and Silicon Valley executives, these legislations are based on the premise that Indian techies are eating into American jobs.

In less than a week of Trump being sworn in as the 45th US President, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, and Assistant Senate Minority Leader Dick Durbin, introduced the "H-1B and L-1 Visa Reform Act" to prioritise American workers and restore fairness in visa programmes for skilled workers.

Grassley is Chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee. Among other things, the H1-B reform bill proposes to eliminate the lottery system and give foreign students educated in the US priority on visas.

The bill would prohibit companies with more than 50 employees, of which at least half are H-1B or L-1 holders, from hiring additional H-1B employees.

It also explicitly prohibits the replacement of American workers by H-1B or L-1 visa holders. The bill among other things would also crackdown on outsourcing companies that import large numbers of H-1B and L-1 workers for temporary training purposes only to send the workers back to their home countries to do the same job.

Specifically, it would prohibit companies with more than 50 employees of which at least half are H-1B or L-1 holders, from hiring additional H-1B employees, a statement said.

It explicitly prohibits the replacement of American workers by H-1B or L-1 visa holders. These provisions address the types of abuses that have been well-documented in recent press reports.

Democrat Zoe Lofgren -- who represents a Congressional district in California that includes Silicon Valley -- introduced 'The High-Skilled Integrity and Fairness Act of 2017'.

As soon as the bill, which proposes a skill and wage- based system for allocation of H-1B visas and seeks to more than double the minimum wage for an H-1B visa holder to USD 130,000, was introduced, stocks of major Indian information technology went down and rattled the USD 150-billion outsourcing industry.

"It's near-impossible to design an immigration system that selects only the highest-paid and still protects the inventiveness and meritocracy that has made Silicon Valley the centre of the tech world," said Ridhika Batra, US-head of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industries.

"Like all forms of protectionism, these measures by (the) US government would only lower standards and reduce productivity, eventually causing the US to lose the edge -- and the income -- that comes with being the undisputed champion of innovation," she said.

The bill among other things proposes setting aside 20 per cent of the annual allocation of H-1B visas for small and start-up employers with 50 or fewer employees.

Utah Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz, and his party colleague in the Senate Senator Mike Lee, have introduced identical bills in the House and the Senate -- Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2017 -- which proposes to eliminate the per-country immigration caps with a first-come-first-served system.

On February 2, Senator Sherrod Brown joined by Joe Donnelly and Kirsten Gillibrand, introduced the "End Outsourcing Act," which aims to ensure that federal contracts are awarded to companies who hire American workers.

Two Republican Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue unveiled the Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE) Act on February 7, which proposes to lower overall immigration to 637,960 in its first year and to 539,958 by its tenth year -- a 50 per cent reduction from the 1,051,031 immigrants who arrived in 2015.

Cotton and Perdue met Trump at the White House on Tuesday, after which they said that H-1B and employment-based Green Card is likely to be reformed to attract the best and the brightest from across the world.

The White House yesterday said the Trump Administration has a natural desire to have a comprehensive look at the H-1B, spousal visa and students visas. Last week, Indian-American Congressman Ro Khanna joined a bipartisan group of three other lawmakers to table a legislation to reform the current H-1B and L1 work visas and end its abuse by foreign companies.

The bill, if passed by both the House and the Senate and signed into law by the US President, would require employers to make a good faith effort to recruit and hire American workers before bringing in foreign workers.

It also prohibits employers from replacing American workers with H-1B and L-1 workers or giving preference to H-1B visa holders when they are filling open positions. It will modify existing H-1B wage requirements, and establishes wage requirements for L-1 workers.

The bill proposes to prohibit employers from outsourcing H-1B and L-1 visa holders to other sites unless the employer obtains a waiver which is available only in limited circumstances when the rights of American workers are protected.

Congressional experts note that it might not be easy to pass a bill on H-1B visas unless there is a consensus or broader agreement on comprehensive immigration reform.

Batra said it is important to deal carefully the underlying shortage of STEM-skilled workers. According to a latest Brookings study by 2020, demand for skilled technologists will exceed the number of qualified applicants by 1 million, leaving USA vulnerable in key areas such as technological innovation, economic development and cybersecurity.

"Moving the allocation decision from an arbitrary process to a market-clearing auction should settle the debate over our economy's demand for skilled immigrant labour, and an incremental success in our highly controversial immigration debate might help break the immigration reform impasse in other areas, as well," Batra said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 12,2020

Kabul, Jun 12: A blast in a mosque during Friday prayers in the western part of capital Kabul has killed at least four people and wounded many more, Afghanistan's interior ministry said.

"Explosives placed inside the Sher Shah Suri Mosque exploded during Friday prayers," said a statement issued by the ministry, which added that the mosque's prayer leader Mofleh Frotan was among those killed.

Interior ministry spokesman Tariq Arian said police have cordoned off the area and helped move the wounded to ambulances and nearby hospitals.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack but a mosque attack earlier this month was claimed by an ISIL (or ISIS) group affiliate, headquartered in eastern Afghanistan's Nangarhar province.

"Interestingly, every time you have the peace process gaining some momentum and pace, you have these kinds of attacks in the country," Habib Wardak, a national security analyst based in Kabul, told Al Jazeera.

"The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the attack that happened last week on a mosque in Kabul, so despite the fact that you have these news and press conference from the government that they have eliminated ISIL, how can they conduct such sophisticated operations?"

Friday's blast had parallels to one earlier this month, when an explosion tore apart a famous Kabul mosque and led to the death of renowned Afghan cleric Maulvi Ayaz Niazi.

"In this attack, the imam seems to be the target, not the rest of the crowd. These are the imams who have supported the peace process with the Taliban movement," Wardak said.

"The other political aspect for these kinds of attacks is that there are peace spoilers trying to convey a message that peace with the Taliban will not eradicate violence in the country because you have ISIL."

Violence has spiked in recent weeks in Afghanistan with most of the attacks claimed by the ISIL affiliate.

The United States blamed the armed group for a horrific attack last month on a maternity hospital in the capital that killed 24 people, including two infants and several new mothers.

The ISIL affiliate also took responsibility for an attack on a bus carrying journalists in Kabul on May 30, killing two.

It also claimed credit for an attack on the funeral of a strongman loyal to the government last month that killed 35 people.

Meanwhile, the US is attempting to broker peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban to end 18 years of war.

Washington's peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad was in the region earlier this week trying to resuscitate a US peace deal with the Taliban.

The peace deal signed in February calls for the withdrawal of the US and NATO troops from Afghanistan in return for a commitment by the Taliban to not launch attacks on the US or its allies.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 17,2020

Vienna, Jun 17: Austrian police fined a man 500 euros for loudly breaking wind after officers stopped him earlier this month to check his identity.

The police defended the massive fine saying he had deliberately emitted a "massive flatulence," lifting his backside from the bench where he was sitting.

The accused complained of what he called the disproportionate and unjustified fine when he gave his account of the June 5 events on the O24 news website.

In reply to social media commentaries that followed, the police in the Austrian capital justified their reaction on Twitter.

"Of course, nobody is put on the spot if one slips out by accident," the police said.

However, in this case, the police said, the young man had appeared "provocative and uncooperative" in general.

He then "slightly raised himself from the bench, looked at the officers and patently, in a completely deliberate way, emitted a massive flatulence in their immediate proximity."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.