www.workforce.com/section/06/feature/25/33/66/index.html [1]

I came across this article called “Microsoft’s Canadian Move a Swipe at Stiff U.S. Visa Policies” (link above) last Friday and was just a tad piqued. The last time I checked on H1b visas, their purpose is to seek “temporary help” from “skilled foreigners” in “specialty occupations.” The requirements are (according to the Immigration & Nationality Act, section 101[a][15][H]):

1. a bachelors degree or higher degree (or foreign equivalent) in a specialty field;
2. at least 12 years of progressive experience in the field;
3. a license to practice in the field;
4. a mix of advanced education and work experience (max 12 years).

A specialty field is typically considered IT, accounting/finance/banking, marketing, advertising, PR, sales, recruiting, all engineering, teaching, health care/medical, telecoms, management and research. So, pretty much every job function…..and you only need to meet ONE of those requirements in one of those fields.

There is also the notion of “dual intent”, where the visa holder can apply for permanent residency. This dual intent is a bone of contention for many individuals; the main area of contention is discrimination. An interesting question arises, “Does the disproportionate use of H1b visas by companies and hiring managers demonstrate that the legislation has been implemented in a discriminatory manner?”

Microsoft complains about having problems finding “top talent.”  Now, the last time I checked Webster’s dictionary (this morning) for a definition of talent, “temporary skilled labor” was not listed. Historically Microsoft has paid its people well, but now that it is a “mature” organization, they tend to pay on the low end of market value which makes H1bs (and offshoring) even more attractive as a labor force. It is well known that H1bs in America make less than their US citizen counterparts.

Microsoft’s argument that there is not enough talent here so they need to bring in more “skilled labor” does not add up. Numbers have been bandied about in the range of 500,000 unemployed high tech workers in America. I am pretty sure they have not hired every IT graduate in the US. To me, their argument for increased H1bs falls apart on this point.

It would seem that Microsoft thinks American developers are not talented, so much so, that only foreign countries have skilled labor. I know a LOT of truly skilled developers and they have not been snapped up by Microsoft. Oh, but they are over 40, have Masters Degrees, and generally earn at least six figures. Why would Microsoft pay them six figures when they (used to) get 3-5 Indians developers for the same price? I write “used to” because India has finally caught on to the salary inequity and is beginning to demand higher salaries, albeit still lower than America. China and other offshore countries will soon catch on and then we’ll be back at square one.

Psychological Contract

This H1b mess began years ago with the offshoring binge. While Microsoft is not the only company to have offshored jobs to India, they are one of the earliest – since 1990. The majority of Microsoft’s offshored jobs were in research and development but has, understandably, evolved to sales and support for the Asia Pacific region.

In the beginning, Americans got scared at having their future offshored. Hence, the gradual drop in American attendance in IT programs. Interestingly though, at this same time, there was an increase in F1 visas for students in technology programs. I suspect this is partly due to the reputation that India’s schools did not produce quality graduates (problems with code persist in offshore environments; does that make those H1b candidates “skilled labor”?). Anyway, many American college students were asking themselves “Why would I enter a field with no job growth in my own country?” Good question.

Offshoring and H1bs violate a basic psychological contract with existing and potential employees. Trust. Company branding has puts its spin on the market, but it is harder to find candidates that want to work for a company that has an extensive offshoring and H1b history. Candidates regularly tell me they are not interested in XYZ company for that reason.

A side outcome of the offshoring/H1b binge is the enablement of foreign nationals to gain experience in hot technologies, i.e., research and development, that could have been exposed to Americans. Companies chose to offshore and transfer US technology to foreign countries, and now they are crying wolf at not having enough local “skilled labor”. For Microsoft, they created their own quagmire.

Oh , and don’t doubt for one minute that American companies are not being granted benefits for offshoring jobs (can you say tax cuts to corporations?)…As an aside, I would be most interested in knowing exactly how many H1bs Microsoft sponsors and in what areas but I digress.

Finding the best talent is one thing, finding cheap labor is another. Am I making some assumptions in the blog piece – Absolutely. But I can guarantee you, H1b visas are not about “talent” or “skilled labor”, but rather cheap (and perhaps indentured) labor. Its just lipstick on a pig.