ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER

Rate this Entry

Will blue cards be the "X factor" in propelling the Europeans past the US in the global economy? The head of Intel is pretty worried.

Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to Facebook Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to Twitter Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to Google Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to StumbleUpon Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to Reddit Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to Digg Submit "EUROPE READY TO TAKE THE LEAD IN COMPETITION FOR TALENT WORKER " to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
  1. R. Lawson's Avatar
    Craig Barret sounds off for more corporate favors. He is wrong on many levels, but for now I'll just focus on where he is right.

    The only point Barrett made that I agree with is on the green cards (or total portability, though he didn't mention that).

    A friend of ours is over for the holidays. She is on the H-1b and awaiting her GC, and expects it in 2009. What she does is counseling in a rural area. Because she has a graduate degree, she says there is some preference and the process is somewhat faster.

    In any event her salary is low and she would like to change jobs. There is high turnover where she is because of the low pay, and she is the only one to stick around (because of the GC process). This scenario seems to repeat itself over and over again in a variety of occupations.

    There are two problems here. One problem is that because the organization she works for are able to exploit a situation (knowingly or unknowingly) the salary remains artificially low. This discourages American workers from staying to serve in the rural areas. And on the flip side of the coin, her career is on hold. She is single and wants to find a husband - I guess there are slim pickings where she is at. Her goal is to move to a larger city and help inner city kids.

    This situation is one that Craig Barrett, Bill Gates, and all of the corprocrats ignore. They show no concern for immigrants, no concern for American workers, and no concern for the social consequences. Their only concern is them making money.

    Although I have no qualms with corporations making money, only considering that one factor is no way to run a country.

    I suggest watching the movie Amazing Grace. I think you will see many parallells between slavery and the H-1b visa. Although they aren't a moral equivilent, of course, there are similarities. The arguments made in the movie by the pro-slavery crowd are eerily similar to the arguments made by the pro-H-1b/indentured servant crowd.

    Can any of you at least agree that corporations should not have sponsorship of immigrants? The very concept is an affront to freedom.
  2. hmm's Avatar
    So did I get it right that those "blue cards" are not convertable to permanent residence? If true, I do not see what's so cool about them. They are like J-1 visa then. The whole point of H1B is that it is a route to GC.
  3. Lou's Avatar
    ok. I booked the movie for this weekend watch
  4. 's Avatar
    All this stuff about Europe is nonsense. Kamal Nath had it right when he says that Europe is a submerging economy. Europe is not competitive on cost and it doesn't have the talent as they are realizing now.

    Of much greater significance are the random announcements about plans to move senior management offshore to India. It implies that critical mass has been reached such that corporations are now confident that they can take policy decisions from offshore rather than just implement those handed down from the US.
  5. 's Avatar
    "Because she has a graduate degree, she says there is some preference and the process is somewhat faster. "

    The preference is not because she has a graduate degree, but because she was born in a smaller country.

    Every country can get upto 2803 (28.6% of 7% of 140,000) a year as long as the job requires an advanced degree. This number includes dependents as well, so it practically means ~1400 primary applicants from a single country can get a green card every year. This results in the uneven wait times we see these days where people from some countries are done with the process in a year or two while others wait 10-15 years.
  6. 's Avatar
    "The preference is not because she has a graduate degree, but because she was born in a smaller country."

    Japan is the country.

    "Every country can get upto 2803 (28.6% of 7% of 140,000) a year as long as the job requires an advanced degree. "

    Maybe that percentage should be raised dramatically. Instead of raising the cap, raise the requirements for most to an advanced degree.
  7. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    If she is from a "smaller country", then EB3 vs EB2 makes a whole lot of difference.

    "Kamal Nath had it right when he says that Europe is a submerging economy. Europe is not competitive on cost and it doesn't have the talent as they are realizing now."

    A-ha, and the reason why Germany has a positive trade balance with China is of course not because Germany can compete with China and sell the Chinese a lot of German-made things, but because China sold all of its cheap stuff to the US, and there is nothing left to sell to the Germans... Maybe, you should buy something useful from Europe, like a brain or something.
  8. 's Avatar
    "Maybe, you should buy something useful from Europe, like a brain or something."

    Show me where Germany=Europe. Seriously Europe isn't even done integrating, and it doesn't even have a respectable army. It's just not in the same league.


  9. 's Avatar
    "Japan is the country."

    Even better. It's a smaller country with great employment opportunities at home. Since only a few thousand Japanese with graduate degrees apply, they do not have to wait much for a green card.

    "Maybe that percentage should be raised dramatically. Instead of raising the cap, raise the requirements for most to an advanced degree."

    That still wouldn't solve it for China or India where people with advanced degrees have to wait 4 and 8 years for a visa. To solve it you'd have to move the cap and add numbers so people aren't waiting that long.
  10. Sid's Avatar
    Roy,

    The only way the non-employer sponsored GC would work is if you don't subject it to quotas. Even with the EB GC's, the system is severely backlogged. Can you imagine what will happen if every non-American is eligible to apply for a GC?

    You can't say that you support a GC system where the applicant does not need to be sponsored by an employer but also subject it to a quota. They are contradictory.
  11. R. Lawson's Avatar
    "You can't say that you support a GC system where the applicant does not need to be sponsored by an employer but also subject it to a quota."

    Sid, the two concepts aren't related. We have plenty of immigration programs that have quotas and do not have employer sponsorship as a requirement.

    So I can say that we need a GC system without employer sponsorship that is subject to quotas. As a business person, who would like to see more entrepreneurs (to grow this economy). I think it would fantastic to have immigrants who are free to start their own business.

    There is still sponsorship in a sense. That sponsor would be the government. It would be the government and only the government who would revoke such sponsorship. Private enterprise can't be trusted with that role. The very nature of private enterprise is to leverage people in a way that they are most productive. Forcing people into endentured servitude (or the likes) gives businesses an unfair competitive advantage. They should not be able to leverage people in that way. People should be able to change jobs at will, without ANY government imposed negative consequence.

    Are you going to watch Amazing Grace? Watch the movie and then tell me what you think of corporate sponsorship.
  12. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    "Seriously Europe isn't even done integrating, and it doesn't even have a respectable army. "

    Even? Ha-ha-ha! Since when does the strength of the economy is measured in "respectable armies"? Remember, the Soviet Union had a "respectable army" - that helped them get bancrupt!
  13. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    PS I dont' really mind if you get a breain from China, instead. China beats the US in competition, anyway. Better yet, from Inida ;-)
  14. 's Avatar
    "Can any of you at least agree that corporations should not have sponsorship of immigrants? The very concept is an affront to freedom."

    There is nothing wrong in having sponsorship as long as it is done properly. Because there is a job waiting for the immigrant, it means that there is greater probability that the system will select productive immigrants.

    "There is still sponsorship in a sense. That sponsor would be the government. It would be the government and only the government who would revoke such sponsorship. Private enterprise can't be trusted with that role."

    Problem with this is that it is the government that has made a hash out of the employment based green card program.
    And the notion that employers are out to get immigrants is false. The AC21 act that raised the H1B quota to 195,000 also contained important provisions to allow portability of a green card application. Unfortunately, in the late 90's and early 00's, continuous re-instatement of relief under 245(i) for illegal immigrants dumped a ton of applications into the system. Something like 6 years worth of applications were received in April 2001. This meant that anyone applying after April 2001 had to wait for an exceedingly long time until the DOL got through thus compromising the protections meant to minimize lock-in.

    Here's a link with one perspective: http://www.ilw.com/articles/2004,1102-endelman.shtm

  15. 's Avatar
    "Even? Ha-ha-ha! Since when does the strength of the economy is measured in "respectable armies"? Remember, the Soviet Union had a "respectable army" - that helped them get bancrupt!"

    You need to take some history lessons. A strong economy and a respectable army are complementary. One cannot exist without the other.

    Europe has had a free ride for the last 50 years by relying on the US army. Somehow I don't think that will be enough in the future.

    So, have you had a chance to look at the trade balance between the EU and China ;-)
  16. R. Lawson's Avatar
    "There is nothing wrong in having sponsorship as long as it is done properly. "

    There is no proper way to give a corporation the power to dictate if a person can or cannot live in this country. That is too much power for a corporation to have. It is also extremely anti-competitive.

    We are talking about educated people with a higher education. They don't need a corporation to babysit them.

    Corporations have really been the fly in the ointment here. What do you consider a proper way of having corporations sponsor people? To me that question is like asking what is the best way to re-institute slavery. Maybe if we only make them work 8 hours a day, give them shelter, plus three square meals it becomes OK. NOT!
  17. Sid's Avatar
    "Sid, the two concepts aren't related. We have plenty of immigration programs that have quotas and do not have employer sponsorship as a requirement."

    Yes they are. Time is of critical value while waiting for a GC. Your insistence on quotas shows total ignorance about the current problem with the EB GC's (I assume that that is what prompted you to suggest a fix). It is due to the quotas that EB immigrants from India and China are waiting for 6-10 years and not company sponsorship. If the time it takes to get a GC is cut down to 1-2 years, do you think corporate sponsorship would be a big issue?

    What you are advocating will make the EB GC system even more backlogged. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the current issues (and queuing theory). There are lots of provisions for portability in the EB GC program. Starting Feb, I (and most EB GC candidates) can switch employers without losing my place in the queue. The catch is that it has to be for a similar job profile.

    "Are you going to watch Amazing Grace? Watch the movie and then tell me what you think of corporate sponsorship."

    Not anytime soon. I'm going to watch "The lives of others" next.
  18. R. Lawson's Avatar
    "What you are advocating will make the EB GC system even more backlogged. "

    No, I'm not advocating that. You are projecting. That is yet another issue all together.

    My desire to remove corporate sponsorship is not related to quotas or a deficient USCIS that is unable to process applications in a reasonable time. Your argument is just ripe with fallacies.
  19. 's Avatar
    "What do you consider a proper way of having corporations sponsor people?"

    I think it can be as simple as requiring a letter from an employer stating they will employ person X at a given salary and for a given position. If this is part of a points based program, then such a job offer would grant extra points to the applicant.
  20. Sid's Avatar
    "No, I'm not advocating that. You are projecting. That is yet another issue all together.

    My desire to remove corporate sponsorship is not related to quotas or a deficient USCIS that is unable to process applications in a reasonable time. Your argument is just ripe with fallacies."

    You are advocating that an individual will be able to apply for a GC on his/her own? Is that true?
    You are also advocating getting rid of the H-1B program since you don't want corporate sponsorship. True?

    If they are, then anyone in the world with a degree will be able to apply for a GC.

    Now, I assume that this number is going to be much more than the number of eligible immigrants currently working/studying in the US. Right?

    With the current quotas in place, will it or will it not lead to huge backlogs?

    I had to dumb down my argument for you to understand what I'm saying. Now which part of it do you not agree with or think that it's a fallacy?
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: