upvote
I work in a global company. As an interviewer, I don't even know if the person I interview is a US citizen. I don't even know if they live in the US or another country, and I'm probably not allowed to ask. I just rate their performance. And everybody is paid the same.

I think the situation is quite simple. Companies want the best candidates they can get, and the larger the recruitment pool, the better.

If tomorrow you were to tell (let say) Google they now need to hire only US citizens, would they lower their hiring bar, or would they expand their Shanghai or Zurich offices? Are US citizens entitled to work at Google more than others for the sole reason they have a particular citizenship?

reply
If the h1bs are given access to the jobs (training and experience), then is it the American's fault that they are no longer considered "best"?

Google (and friends) famously have teams composed of a single national origin. What does that say about their hiring bar?

Google (and friends) are already expanding the Shanghai and Zurich offices.

reply
> Companies want the best candidates they can get, and the larger the recruitment pool, the better.

Yes, at the lowest wages they can get. Increase supply -> lower prices (wages) -> more corporate profits!

However, there are those who believe that corporate profits are not the highest good. Some of us also care about the earnings of American workers.

Also, "best candidates" alone does not "best company" make. You need people who can work well together—which requires some degree of culture fit. Immigration restrictions help preserve the cultural homogeneity that makes collaboration and social trust possible.

reply
> I think the situation is quite simple. Companies want the best candidates they can get, and the larger the recruitment pool, the better.

Respectfully, this sounds terribly naive.

reply
Having worked at a few large companies, this was the case at all of them. I do think there is a messy middle of companies built on vibes.
reply
There are 2 issues:

1/ Employment provides training and experience. If the h1bs are given access to the jobs (training and experience), then is it the American's fault that they are no longer considered "best"?

2/ h1b increases labor supply, not the demand. More supply, means lower wages for everyone.

reply
Why? All big and even medium tech companies have dev offices in EU and India. As example since it's much easier to deal with visas say in Ireland a lot of hiring was shifted to Irish offices.
reply
deleted
reply
> I just rate their performance. And everybody is paid the same.

For some visa classes, the law says you should hire an American citizen if they can do the job - not if they rank first at whiteboards or fizz-buzz.

> If tomorrow you were to tell (let say) Google they now need to hire only US citizens, would they lower their hiring bar

Does it really matter? To a point, obviously, but a lot of people are good enough for the role without being the world's best. The bar for getting into Google has dropped since its early days, and Google keeps breaking profit records quarter after quarter.

This entire "hire the best or nothing" mindset has led to a dysfunctional hiring process that's a pain to both employers and employees, and is prima facie unachievable.

reply
> not if they rank first at whiteboards or fizz-buzz.

As an interviewer, I don't rank candidates. I have my set of questions, some candidates solve them, others don't. You can argue that it's the bar to do your job properly. Should politicians tell big tech companies what's the bar for being a successful SWE?

> When it comes to national interest, the argument for "meritocracy" falls apart quickly.

A lot of US tech exists because of skilled foreign workers. I'm not sure what would be the tech industry without them.

reply
> As an interviewer, I don't rank candidates

Someone in your org does - an individual or committee: that's the entire purpose of the hiring pipeline. I've interviewed candidates at multiple companies small and (extremely) big, and interviews always have to give recommendations for ranking purposes (out of 10/100, or (strong-/)yes / maybe / (strong-/)no)

I am not attacking you personally, but the fact remains: in some circumstances hiring "the best" - when they happen to be a non-citizen - can be in contravention with the law depending on the visa class and whether you failed to find an American capable of doing the job.

Don't just take my word for it, big tech companies have lost or settled multiple AG suits because they tried to hide job postings from Americans, e.g. by posting SWE/PM jobs in some podunk, print-only Farmers-Weekly-type magazines.

> A lot of US tech exists because of skilled foreign workers.

I fully agree. Unfortunately being skilled doesn't grant them the right to vote, and as young people keep finding out, those who write (and sign) laws care a lot about what actual voters think and feel. You have to get into office first before you can do the hard labor-policy stuff.

reply
I was a hiring manager. H1B candidates got exactly the same wage as native born. There were no differences.
reply
Being paid the same as the other guy doesn't necessarily mean the wages themselves stayed the same. Adding H1B candidates to the talent pool exerts downward pressure on salary due to the law of supply and demand. I can't say for sure whether the allure of a green card or threat of deportation play a material factor in lowering the average salary that H1B immigrants are willing to accept. But in an environment where talent is treated as fungible (even if it isn't always so), any such downward pressure affects everyone.
reply
The prevailing wage for H1B software engineers is a very good salary for most software engineers in the world.

It's common for the prevailing wage to be double what that person could earn in their country of origin.

reply
That's the parent's argument. Prevailing wage in country A is X. Prevailing wage in country B is Y, and according to your numbers X > 2Y. Person from country B emigrates to country A and accepts wage 1.9Y, putting downward pressure on the jobs in country A at wage X.
reply
Yeah, I'm agreeing.

You don't need the carrot of a green card or the stick of deportation to make a software engineer on an H1B accept a depressed wage, because it's not depressed relative to their alternatives.

reply
And still exert downward pressure on wages. Just by virtue of having more people in the pool.
reply
This would only make sense if there are a finite number of possible jobs and that more jobs are never added as an economy grows.
reply
The idea is that the "same wage" you are talking about is too low to hire enough employees in the time needed that the company needed so they had to look abroad for people willing to work for that amount.
reply
The reality is everyone shamelessly cheats at this. "Oh, woe is me! I put out a classified ad in the paper edition of the Witchita County Post-Dispatch, instructing interested applicatants to snail-mail their resume and fax their cover letter—and somehow, no Americans applied! I guess I will just have to use H-1B, sigh"
reply
Actually they get normal wages now. H1B’s get hired because H1B’s are now in hiring, recruiting, HR, etc.. they stack the candidate pool with their own shamelessly. I’ve seen it first hand.
reply
deleted
reply
The news is about immigrant visas and H1B is temporary non-immigrant visa...
reply
How does companies hiring h1b-holders (a non-immigrant visa) relate to a pause on immigrant visa applications?
reply
Isn't that a work visa and not an immigrant visa
reply
H-1B / L-1 are non-immigrant visas, immigrant visas are green cards yes. Pausing green card processing in consulates after (on sketchy legal grounds) forcing folks to not do adjustment of status for getting an immigrant visa inside the country is, indeed, how the admin is trying to get around doing their job the way the INA intends them to.
reply
H-1B is dual intent, isn't it?
reply
That only means you won't be denied if you express immigration intent during interview. Besides that it's nothing special. There is no special path to GC/naturalization for H1Bs.
reply
If you mean the memo earlier this year, it was about tourist visas and similar doing aos in country when they are not dual intent visas, which makes it iffy.

They explicitly said that for h1b and l1 aos wouldn’t be affected as they are dual intent visas.

reply
Oh cool, good thing labor isn't fungible and nobody ever outsources.

What a brilliant plan. Lets make sure that we restrict the supply of doctors and medical personell, that's sure to improve care!

reply
As a hiring manager no one tells you who is an immigrant and who isn’t when you interview them.
reply
As an interviewee I've read "we're not sponsoring visas at this time" a million times.
reply
Recently[1] Microsoft laid off several thousand domestic employees while simultaneously hiring a couple thousand employer-sponsored-Visa workers.

[1]https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-layoffs-2026-xbox-h1b-vis...

reply
And yet, they never applied the simple option of ranking the visa applications by salary, and approving in order of demand for the talent.

That would be a market based solution that allows everyone to get the talent they need without driving down American wages.

But the point isn't about helping Americans, it's about being peedormatively against letting in brown people.

reply
They are doing that now too, however the problem is that h1b is used for roles outside of tech, believe it or not, and if you measure everything by Bay Area tech salaries a bunch of necessary but lower paying jobs will go unfilled
reply
If it's truly necessary, the fact that it's unfilled would be directly related to it being low paid.

And if the employer isn't willing to pay the cost of labor to fill the position, it directly raises the question of whether its "necessary".

reply