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
July 2,2020

Moscow, Jul 2: Russian voters approved changes to the constitution that will allow President Vladimir Putin to hold power until 2036, but the weeklong plebiscite that concluded Wednesday was tarnished by widespread reports of pressure on voters and other irregularities.

With most of the nation's polls closed and 20% of precincts counted, 72% voted for the constitutional amendments, according to election officials.

For the first time in Russia, polls were kept open for a week to bolster turnout without increasing crowds casting ballots amid the coronavirus pandemic a provision that Kremlin critics denounced as an extra tool to manipulate the outcome.

A massive propaganda campaign and the opposition's failure to mount a coordinated challenge helped Putin get the result he wanted, but the plebiscite could end up eroding his position because of the unconventional methods used to boost participation and the dubious legal basis for the balloting.

By the time polls closed in Moscow and most other parts of Western Russia, the overall turnout was at 65%, according to election officials. In some regions, almost 90% of eligible voters cast ballots.

On Russia's easternmost Chukchi Peninsula, nine hours ahead of Moscow, officials quickly announced full preliminary results showing 80% of voters supported the amendments, and in other parts of the Far East, they said over 70% of voters backed the changes.

Kremlin critics and independent election observers questioned the turnout figures.

We look at neighboring regions, and anomalies are obvious there are regions where the turnout is artificially (boosted), there are regions where it is more or less real, Grigory Melkonyants, co-chair of the independent election monitoring group Golos, told The Associated Press.

Putin voted at a Moscow polling station, dutifully showing his passport to the election worker. His face was uncovered, unlike most of the other voters who were offered free masks at the entrance.

The vote completes a convoluted saga that began in January, when Putin first proposed the constitutional changes.

He offered to broaden the powers of parliament and redistribute authority among the branches of government, stoking speculation he might seek to become parliamentary speaker or chairman of the State Council when his presidential term ends in 2024.

His intentions became clear only hours before a vote in parliament, when legislator Valentina Tereshkova, a Soviet-era cosmonaut who was the first woman in space in 1963, proposed letting him run two more times.

The amendments, which also emphasize the primacy of Russian law over international norms, outlaw same-sex marriages and mention a belief in God as a core value, were quickly passed by the Kremlin-controlled legislature.

Putin, who has been in power for more than two decades longer than any other Kremlin leader since Soviet dictator Josef Stalin said he would decide later whether to run again in 2024.

He argued that resetting the term count was necessary to keep his lieutenants focused on their work instead of darting their eyes in search for possible successors.

Analyst Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin political consultant, said Putin's push to hold the vote despite the fact that Russia has thousands of new coronavirus infections each day reflected his potential vulnerabilities.

Putin lacks confidence in his inner circle and he's worried about the future, Pavlovsky said.

He wants an irrefutable proof of public support.

Even though the parliament's approval was enough to make it law, the 67-year-old Russian president put his constitutional plan to voters to showcase his broad support and add a democratic veneer to the changes.

But then the coronavirus pandemic engulfed Russia, forcing him to postpone the April 22 plebiscite.

The delay made Putin's campaign blitz lose momentum and left his constitutional reform plan hanging as the damage from the virus mounted and public discontent grew.

Plummeting incomes and rising unemployment during the outbreak have dented his approval ratings, which sank to 59%, the lowest level since he came to power, according to the Levada Center, Russia's top independent pollster.

Moscow-based political analyst Ekaterina Schulmann said the Kremlin had faced a difficult dilemma: Holding the vote sooner would have brought accusations of jeopardizing public health for political ends, while delaying it raised the risks of defeat.

Holding it in the autumn would have been too risky, she said.

In Moscow, several activists briefly lay on Red Square, forming the number 2036 with their bodies in protest before police stopped them.

Some others in Moscow and St. Petersburg staged one-person pickets and police didn't intervene.

Several hundred opposition supporters rallied in central Moscow to protest the changes, defying a ban on public gatherings imposed for the coronavirus outbreak. Police didn't intervene and even handed masks to the participants.

Authorities mounted a sweeping effort to persuade teachers, doctors, workers at public sector enterprises and others who are paid by the state to cast ballots. Reports surfaced from across the vast country of managers coercing people to vote.

The Kremlin has used other tactics to boost turnout and support for the amendments.

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
May 30,2020

May 30: Warning of the tightrope walk ahead as governments battle the coronavirus crisis, Nobel laureate Peter Charles Doherty has expressed concern about densely populated countries such as India relaxing lockdown norms while also describing a complete shutdown as “an economic and social impossibility”.

The Australian immunologist, who cautioned that the number of COVID-19 cases will rise in the coming days, said the earliest time frame for an effective vaccine “going into large numbers of people” is nine to 12 months.

"If all goes well with testing, we could know if some of the candidate vaccines are both safe and effective as early as September/October. Then, rolling a vaccine out will depend on the type of product and how quickly it can be made, put in vials and so forth," Doherty told PTI in an email interview from Melbourne.

The novel coronavirus, he added, does not change fast like influenza and, from what is known so far, “the same vaccine should work everywhere”.

Doherty, who is with the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at the Doherty Institute, University of Melbourne, won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1996 for his discovery of how the body’s immune system distinguishes virus-infected cells from normal ones.

Discussing the lockdown, he said, "If it was purely a matter of hard science, everywhere should stay locked down. But that’s pretty much an economic and social impossibility.”

The expectation, he said, is the numbers will rise and limiting spread will depend on people acting responsibly and the capacity for rapid response and extensive contact testing.

“And in a densely populated country like India I think that it will be very difficult," the scientist said.

Several countries, including India, began relaxing lockdown norms in mid-May despite the WHO’s warning about a second wave. India’s lockdown began on March 25 and has since been extended. The fourth phase ends on Sunday.

Asked whether there are any alternatives to a lockdown, the 79-year-old said, "There is no other option other than closing borders. South Korea, for example, conducted massive, intensive testing and contact tracing in a wealthy country with a very disciplined population. Otherwise, not till we have effective vaccines."

He added that he personally doesn’t see the point of closing borders for people coming in if there’s already a high incidence of disease in the community, “unless it’s to avoid the need to care for them and use scarce hospital beds".

According to Doherty, the coronavirus "is a new virus which has come straight out of nature".

“It (the virus) has moved so rapidly across the world because of people travelling on international planes as well as tourist ships," he added.

The immunologist also warned against the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, and said current and planned trials of the anti-malaria drug should be stopped.

“My understanding is that the use of the drug in severe disease is definitely contra-indicated, but it’s not yet clear whether, if taken under medical supervision, it could have some useful effect if taken early on, or as a preventive. Those trials just haven’t been done properly," Doherty noted.

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has backed the use of hydroxychloroquine as a preventive against COVID-19 even after the WHO suspended clinical trials of the drug citing safety concerns.

Asked whether plasma therapy can be an effective treatment for COVID-19, Doherty said, "We lack good properly controlled trials but, especially if the plasma has been tested for antibody levels and there’s evidence of good activity, it could be helpful. If I had the disease and was offered plasma therapy I would certainly accept, but I would not take hydroxychloroquine."

Doherty is also very optimistic about herd immunity developing against the SARS-CoV-2 infection.

"We think that (herd immunity) will cut in and have an obvious effect when, say, 60 per cent of people have been infected. Best hope is to boost herd immunity with a vaccine," he stated.

Herd immunity is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease that occurs when a large percentage of a population has become immune to an infection, whether through vaccination or previous infections.

The number of COVID-19 cases have crossed 5.9 million and the fatalities 3,65,000, according to the Johns Hopkins University on Saturday. 

In India, the death toll has risen to 4,971 and the number of cases to 1,73,763, according to the Union Health Ministry on Saturday.

Several states, including Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, have reported a rise in number since lockdown norms were relaxed in early May and migrant workers reached home.

In Uttar Pradesh, for instance, the number of infections rose from around 3,000 on May 4 to 6,532 on May 26. Similarly, Bihar’s numbers increased from around 500 to over 2,700 in the period.

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 30,2020

Beijing, June 30: China said on Tuesday it was concerned about India’s decision to ban Chinese mobile apps such as Bytedance’s TikTok and Tencent’s WeChat and was making checks to verify the situation.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters during a daily briefing that (the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government of) India has a responsibility to uphold the rights of Chinese businesses.

India on Monday banned 59, mostly Chinese, mobile apps in its strongest move yet targeting China in the online space since a border crisis erupted between the two countries this month.

The apps are “prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India, the defence of India, the security of state and public order", the ministry of information technology said in a statement, which came two weeks after 20 Indian Army personnel were killed in a violent clash on the India-China border in Ladakh.

The companies have been invited to offer clarifications before a government panel, which will decide whether the ban can be removed or will stay.

The move also came ahead of military and diplomatic talks between India and China scheduled this week.

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.