Today, Citizen Carrie again exposes the H-1B charade, where American companies, companies that have profited from the free flow of capital and various kinds of infrastructure, once again go, hat in hand, to Congress to beg for more visas to bring in foreign information technology workers. As I've stated before, as an experienced software worker, I am quite passionate on this issue, so much so that I hesitate to write about it lest I devolve into a sputtering quivering mess. But I shall try to remain composed this time.
Carrie points us to yesterday's Washington Post editorial titled "Visas Needed." It's pretty easy to see what tack this venerable newspaper is going to take on this issue, and they predictably run through the Bill Gates-approved list of talking points. In particular, "If nothing changes, America will miss out on another crop of talent this year. H1-B visas are reserved for the world's best and brightest, and barring their entry is economic self-sabotage."
Who are these best and brightest? Let's agree not to discuss that these "highly skilled" workers include fashion models (I think we can all agree that we have a lamentable lack of domestic super-hotties). The main qualification is that the worker have a bachelor's degree. Given that the U.S. produces about 1.2 million of these talented people a year (in all fields), I hardly think we can be sure that getting through three or four years of post-secondary education confers "brightest" status, even in China and India.
The Post goes on, "because lawmakers lack the political will to keep the world's talent in America, companies are following it overseas." That's right, because stupid Americans can't handle this work and refuse to get relevant degrees, companies have to go to the expense of moving work and operations to foreign countries. It's just a happy coincidence that these brilliant, bright-eyed, motivated young people will work for considerably smaller salaries.
Need I point out that, like so many other writers on this subject, the Post is confusing cause and effect. American students aren't leaving technical fields because they're dumb, or because, all of a sudden, accounting is looking so attractive. It's because they see those jobs either going overseas or paying less, and it no longer makes sense to plan for a career in such an unstable field. (I live in a Chicago suburb that was built on tech companies; I would wager that every high schooler in our town today has a friend's parent or parent's friend who has seen their life damaged by uncertainty.)
The worst thing about this editorial is the internal illogic. The last line is, "Allowing the cap to stay so low effectively exiles not only the world's best and brightest but also the U.S. companies that employ them." First, the word "exile" is misused, it refers to people unable to live in their own country. More importantly, the writer has just told us that American countries are (reluctantly, I'm sure) moving those jobs overseas, so "the best and brightest" are still being employed, and U.S. companies are still able to take advantage of their purported superior skills.
To discuss this issue without mentioning the experienced tech worker, the person who is increasingly squeezed into unemployment or underemployment, working as a contractor, following jobs around the country, for less money, is intellectually bankrupt.
Of course, we can explain this bankruptcy by looking at all the disinformation being spread around like spring manure. Not only is Uncle Bill Gates the only member of the public to be asked to testify to his worshipful fans, I'm sorry, I meant the elected Congress of the United States, but there are numerous articles in every publication you can think of attesting to the desperate need we have to overlook American workers in favor of those who arecheaper better.
Once again, it is Carrie who points us there by finding a tearjerker of an article in Network World. If the stories of American companies lining up at the H-1B trough, only to be turned away by our heartless lawmakers, doesn't bring a tear or three to your eye, you're a harder man than I. These companies have to get their paperwork in on time, and "there is pressure to have no errors or unflagged issues." (Naturally, there is a cadre of "immigration experts" lined up to help the beleaguered firm through this onerous process.)
The article does give some hope, as there are ways around the H-1B nightmare. There are H-1B1, TN, and L-1 visas that might be used to slip more of the "best and brightest" around the barriers.
And there is a last resort: "if IT hiring managers exhaust options outside of the company, then they need to look at the pool of talent already producing at the company." Yes, you can take junior people already at the company, "take some chances on training and development," and hope that they can be as valuable as Rahul or Li-Chin, unlikely as that sounds.
One of the sources for this article is Jennifer Russell, VP and director of recruiting for a direct-marketing firm in Boston, Digitas. She desperately wants H-1Bs, but allows as how they might be able to hire someone with "80% of the skills needed...[and] teach the other 20% of skills."
So it may be instructive to see just what kind of talent Digitas needs. First, let's look at the Digitas approach:
Let's move on to a specific job, one in my field, and they have a posting for a Software Engineer right here in Chicago. I won't copy the whole thing (you can see it here), mainly because it features some of the most god-awful spacing I've ever seen on a web page.
This innovative company is certainly full of innovation, especially as they look to a future without hyphens (data driven, internet based). The ubiquity of the Internet will lead to the loss of its capital letter (internet). One of the skills the lucky applicant will have is to, "Posses advanced JavaScript development skills"; oh, dare I dream that I will posses such skills.
Several times the computer language is referred to as "java." They'd like the candidate to be able to handle "servlets" or "servelets," they aren't sure which. You would need to be "proficient in XML and it's role and application in complex software projects," which, other than being incoherent, misuses "it's." I hope you have the "ability to play leadership within smaller teams." Let's not forget a "general understanding of user interfaces and how they effect applications design," a statement charming in its total lack of knowledge (even assuming they mean "affect," one designs interfaces as part of the application). Another responsibility: "Mentor more junior team members in utilized technical skills." And, you want to, "become a recognized subject matter expert within their fields of expertise," though it's not at all clear who this "their" is.
Oh, and, of course, "high quality" is expected.
Perhaps Digitas has hit on a truly novel strategy; they will argue for increased H-1B visas on the grounds that the Indians and Chinese they'll bring here to "create loyal brands" will actually upgrade their English.
I suppose it's pointless to discuss how appalling this all is. Digitas can't even write a job posting in properly-formed English, but they want to avoid hiring Americans (Jennifer herself doesn't seem very comfortable with the language: referring to H-1B visas, "it is not company policy to not go for them").
Yet these are the people whose voices are heard on this subject. As we devalue our own workers, we act as if an accent is enough to confer brilliance. As long as we encourage companies to game the system to hire the lowest-cost workers possible, we will destroy this industry in our own country.
But what will our people do? We can't all do "active branding," can we?
Carrie points us to yesterday's Washington Post editorial titled "Visas Needed." It's pretty easy to see what tack this venerable newspaper is going to take on this issue, and they predictably run through the Bill Gates-approved list of talking points. In particular, "If nothing changes, America will miss out on another crop of talent this year. H1-B visas are reserved for the world's best and brightest, and barring their entry is economic self-sabotage."
Who are these best and brightest? Let's agree not to discuss that these "highly skilled" workers include fashion models (I think we can all agree that we have a lamentable lack of domestic super-hotties). The main qualification is that the worker have a bachelor's degree. Given that the U.S. produces about 1.2 million of these talented people a year (in all fields), I hardly think we can be sure that getting through three or four years of post-secondary education confers "brightest" status, even in China and India.
The Post goes on, "because lawmakers lack the political will to keep the world's talent in America, companies are following it overseas." That's right, because stupid Americans can't handle this work and refuse to get relevant degrees, companies have to go to the expense of moving work and operations to foreign countries. It's just a happy coincidence that these brilliant, bright-eyed, motivated young people will work for considerably smaller salaries.
Need I point out that, like so many other writers on this subject, the Post is confusing cause and effect. American students aren't leaving technical fields because they're dumb, or because, all of a sudden, accounting is looking so attractive. It's because they see those jobs either going overseas or paying less, and it no longer makes sense to plan for a career in such an unstable field. (I live in a Chicago suburb that was built on tech companies; I would wager that every high schooler in our town today has a friend's parent or parent's friend who has seen their life damaged by uncertainty.)
The worst thing about this editorial is the internal illogic. The last line is, "Allowing the cap to stay so low effectively exiles not only the world's best and brightest but also the U.S. companies that employ them." First, the word "exile" is misused, it refers to people unable to live in their own country. More importantly, the writer has just told us that American countries are (reluctantly, I'm sure) moving those jobs overseas, so "the best and brightest" are still being employed, and U.S. companies are still able to take advantage of their purported superior skills.
To discuss this issue without mentioning the experienced tech worker, the person who is increasingly squeezed into unemployment or underemployment, working as a contractor, following jobs around the country, for less money, is intellectually bankrupt.
Of course, we can explain this bankruptcy by looking at all the disinformation being spread around like spring manure. Not only is Uncle Bill Gates the only member of the public to be asked to testify to his worshipful fans, I'm sorry, I meant the elected Congress of the United States, but there are numerous articles in every publication you can think of attesting to the desperate need we have to overlook American workers in favor of those who are
Once again, it is Carrie who points us there by finding a tearjerker of an article in Network World. If the stories of American companies lining up at the H-1B trough, only to be turned away by our heartless lawmakers, doesn't bring a tear or three to your eye, you're a harder man than I. These companies have to get their paperwork in on time, and "there is pressure to have no errors or unflagged issues." (Naturally, there is a cadre of "immigration experts" lined up to help the beleaguered firm through this onerous process.)
The article does give some hope, as there are ways around the H-1B nightmare. There are H-1B1, TN, and L-1 visas that might be used to slip more of the "best and brightest" around the barriers.
And there is a last resort: "if IT hiring managers exhaust options outside of the company, then they need to look at the pool of talent already producing at the company." Yes, you can take junior people already at the company, "take some chances on training and development," and hope that they can be as valuable as Rahul or Li-Chin, unlikely as that sounds.
One of the sources for this article is Jennifer Russell, VP and director of recruiting for a direct-marketing firm in Boston, Digitas. She desperately wants H-1Bs, but allows as how they might be able to hire someone with "80% of the skills needed...[and] teach the other 20% of skills."
So it may be instructive to see just what kind of talent Digitas needs. First, let's look at the Digitas approach:
So it's just possible that, having stated boldly that they use "diverse international talent," they may not be entirely objective about the use of visas; that they are a subsidiary of the French media giant Publicis Groupe probably doesn't matter either. (I could parse their approach further, but I'll leave that task to the reader - needless to say, it's corporate speak for nothing.)The transformation of the media landscape throughout world markets both demands and enables big changes in marketing. Brands can no longer afford to market at customers; they must seize and invent new ways of working harder with and for them. Winning brands, today more than ever, are loyal brands.
Our approach to creating loyal brands we call active branding. It brings together:
new ways of listening harder to customers for actionable insights ideas that earn customer engagement through valuable and motivating experiences new ways of being responsive to customers across channels and over time collaborative creativity that includes media and technology at its core new practices for content creation and digital production new data analytics, tools, and operations to support and measure more dynamic customer interaction and content distribution a large network of diverse international talent, allowing us to design global client teams that are both agile and effective Above all, we are committed to our clients, inspired by their customers, excited by change, and fueled by a passion for collaboration and bold invention.
Let's move on to a specific job, one in my field, and they have a posting for a Software Engineer right here in Chicago. I won't copy the whole thing (you can see it here), mainly because it features some of the most god-awful spacing I've ever seen on a web page.
This innovative company is certainly full of innovation, especially as they look to a future without hyphens (data driven, internet based). The ubiquity of the Internet will lead to the loss of its capital letter (internet). One of the skills the lucky applicant will have is to, "Posses advanced JavaScript development skills"; oh, dare I dream that I will posses such skills.
Several times the computer language is referred to as "java." They'd like the candidate to be able to handle "servlets" or "servelets," they aren't sure which. You would need to be "proficient in XML and it's role and application in complex software projects," which, other than being incoherent, misuses "it's." I hope you have the "ability to play leadership within smaller teams." Let's not forget a "general understanding of user interfaces and how they effect applications design," a statement charming in its total lack of knowledge (even assuming they mean "affect," one designs interfaces as part of the application). Another responsibility: "Mentor more junior team members in utilized technical skills." And, you want to, "become a recognized subject matter expert within their fields of expertise," though it's not at all clear who this "their" is.
Oh, and, of course, "high quality" is expected.
Perhaps Digitas has hit on a truly novel strategy; they will argue for increased H-1B visas on the grounds that the Indians and Chinese they'll bring here to "create loyal brands" will actually upgrade their English.
I suppose it's pointless to discuss how appalling this all is. Digitas can't even write a job posting in properly-formed English, but they want to avoid hiring Americans (Jennifer herself doesn't seem very comfortable with the language: referring to H-1B visas, "it is not company policy to not go for them").
Yet these are the people whose voices are heard on this subject. As we devalue our own workers, we act as if an accent is enough to confer brilliance. As long as we encourage companies to game the system to hire the lowest-cost workers possible, we will destroy this industry in our own country.
But what will our people do? We can't all do "active branding," can we?
4 comments:
I'm glad you stayed composed long enough to write a very good post :-)
I love how a company is willing to go out on a limb and hire an American who only has an 80% skills set match. When it comes to H-1B's, it seems companies are willing to accept a 20% skills set match, and are happy to have Americans bring them up to speed on the remaining 80%.
Man, don't you just love these walking, talking bundles of buzz-words and bizz-speak? I remember being mystified when first encountering them early in my career - you could hear the flies buzzing around in their brain-pans, they seemed incapable of articulating simple, straightforward concepts in simple, straightforward language, and yet they always seemed to hold on to their jobs, and the walls of their offices were plastered with all kinds of management awards. I intuited at an early age that this did not bode well for the future.
"As we devalue our own workers, we act as if an accent is enough to confer brilliance. As long as we encourage companies to game the system to hire the lowest-cost workers possible, we will destroy this industry in our own country."
Yup.
But what will our people do?"
For a start, I think we need to be clear about the "we" here. "We" are on are own. These guys and their enablers in Congress are way beyond such concepts as "fellow citizens" and "national interest" to which we yokels remain loyal. I think a lot of us still believe that these things have traction with these employers. They don't. They don't give a damn about this country in the long term. To us, it's our home, our nation. To them, it's a convenience, a labor clearinghouse, and, for the time being, a cash cow. Citizenship and residency aren't privileges but commodities they feel are theirs to trade, liquidate, devalue as they please. (I keep imagining a comedy sketch where one of the usual suspects gets up before Congress and tearfully insists that "in order for the U.S. to remain competitive in the new global economy, we must replace the entire existing citizen workforce with foreign nationals!")
I don't know yet where to go from here, but it's useful to clearly set out who's for us and who's agin'.
Welcome, red (or as the NYT would have it, Mr. or Ms. oak):
Thanks for the comment. I had similar experiences, in that I came out of school with, perhaps, a little too much training but a modicum of smarts. It didn't take me long to see that the jargonizing no-thinkers were running things, and acting as if those of us who were trying to think were the crazy ones.
I really liked your comment; interestingly enough, I've been working on a (too-long) post about the cash cow idea, which I'll put up one of these days.
Anyway, thanks for stopping by, hope you come back.
Thanks for the welcome - glad you enjoyed the comment. Look forward to more thoughts about the cash cow.
Perhaps we should jargonize "jargonizing non-thinkers", a felicitous phrase. "How'd that meeting go today?" "Oh, you know how it is. Mostly JNTs attending, so time wasted and nothing accomplished." "I'm gonna go postal if I have to sit through one more JNT's ppt presentation."
Or maybe "jants". Freakin' jants.
Post a Comment