purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
wallpaper irthday wishes
Cheran
03-15 08:55 AM
Is the same argument, "you can travel to home country with expired US Visa" valid for London too? I will be visiting India coming June and my visa is expired...
sam_hoosier
03-26 10:18 AM
I am hoping to travel via emirates to bangalore..I have avoided other airlines due to transit visa issues...any experince using Emirates??.
I have traveled on Emirates to Chennai a couple of times but that was via London. Emirates is definitely among the top 5 airlines in the world in terms of customer service. Nice & comfirtable seats, great food, transit at Dubai was a breeze. Would definitely recommend :)
I have traveled on Emirates to Chennai a couple of times but that was via London. Emirates is definitely among the top 5 airlines in the world in terms of customer service. Nice & comfirtable seats, great food, transit at Dubai was a breeze. Would definitely recommend :)
2011 Happy Birthday Wishes Birthday
santa123
06-11 12:25 AM
I have an approved labor and curious to know if PP is only for H1 extensions and not open to all. Thanks!
more...
Anders �stberg
June 4th, 2004, 02:24 PM
:D :D
That's funny!
And, I don't mind at all. :)
That's funny!
And, I don't mind at all. :)
visafreedom
07-03 11:15 AM
Well, here are the thoughts.
American Govt only listens when it sees an economic impact. Get thousands of such workers to not work a day, I am sure it would mean a huge economic impact. This is sending a signal that we dont tolerate this "pseudo-slavery" and that today we dont work a day but tomorrow we will be forced to leave this country (I know already several people who have done that and it is becoming more and more common for people to abstain from coming to this land of opportunity as the system is now less favorable)
If hundreds of thousands dont go to work, congress, corporates, press - the whole gamut would become sensitive to the issue. This is one way you can get them to lobby for our demands.
Taking out rally is also a very good way of doing it however if you did this in one place, the turnout will not be as impressive. Doing it in multiple cities needs an organization.
Bottomline, whatever you do, show solidarity, resolve, unity. That has never happened within this affected group of workers.
American Govt only listens when it sees an economic impact. Get thousands of such workers to not work a day, I am sure it would mean a huge economic impact. This is sending a signal that we dont tolerate this "pseudo-slavery" and that today we dont work a day but tomorrow we will be forced to leave this country (I know already several people who have done that and it is becoming more and more common for people to abstain from coming to this land of opportunity as the system is now less favorable)
If hundreds of thousands dont go to work, congress, corporates, press - the whole gamut would become sensitive to the issue. This is one way you can get them to lobby for our demands.
Taking out rally is also a very good way of doing it however if you did this in one place, the turnout will not be as impressive. Doing it in multiple cities needs an organization.
Bottomline, whatever you do, show solidarity, resolve, unity. That has never happened within this affected group of workers.
more...
chunky
07-27 09:45 AM
But the questions is will her 485 application abandoned if she applied for H4 in consulate.
I heard 485 is abandoned if you change status and come to US without AP.
Thanks
she can apply for H4 when you visit India, as long as you maintain H1. she does not have to wait for H4 COs to be approved. In fact she does not have to file for one.
The requirement is that to reenter she needs to have H4 stamped to enter with receipt of I-485 in lieu of AP, not when she leaves because as soon as she leaves the country the status is gone. A status is valid only while in USA. In fact COS will not give her a stamp and since hers is H4 and you have approved H1 she doev not need approval from USCIS for that.
If the case had been different, she was applying for H1 then she would have needed an approved petition first.
I heard 485 is abandoned if you change status and come to US without AP.
Thanks
she can apply for H4 when you visit India, as long as you maintain H1. she does not have to wait for H4 COs to be approved. In fact she does not have to file for one.
The requirement is that to reenter she needs to have H4 stamped to enter with receipt of I-485 in lieu of AP, not when she leaves because as soon as she leaves the country the status is gone. A status is valid only while in USA. In fact COS will not give her a stamp and since hers is H4 and you have approved H1 she doev not need approval from USCIS for that.
If the case had been different, she was applying for H1 then she would have needed an approved petition first.
2010 Happy Birthday Wishes Photos
neerajkandhari
10-05 09:29 PM
waiting for AP
july 2 filer
july 2 filer
more...
breddy2000
01-23 10:41 AM
Can someone explain me what this processing date means?
Is it the Receipt date or the Notice date? Assuming you have a receipt date of July 2nd 2007 and Notice date as Aug 12th 2007, does it mean the 485 case has been processed and pre-approved assuming if no RFE is raised on the case.
Any expert comments
Is it the Receipt date or the Notice date? Assuming you have a receipt date of July 2nd 2007 and Notice date as Aug 12th 2007, does it mean the 485 case has been processed and pre-approved assuming if no RFE is raised on the case.
Any expert comments
hair Happy Birthday Wishes For Him
black_logs
05-25 10:26 PM
Guys,
So finally we're out of Senate with a thundorous victory. We have almost all our provisions in place. I want to thank QGA , The Senators & Staffers of several Senators who helped us sailing thru this 'like a charm'.
Thanks
So finally we're out of Senate with a thundorous victory. We have almost all our provisions in place. I want to thank QGA , The Senators & Staffers of several Senators who helped us sailing thru this 'like a charm'.
Thanks
more...
Dipika
11-25 12:43 PM
Hi, is anyone planning for H1b stamping at Tijuana mexico on 30th November. If so, please contact and we shall plan together. I am in LA area. Thanks!
Did you last stamped in Tijuana? Because Rule is just changed.
NEW RULE:
http://www..com/experience/readentries.do?category=22
You can have H1B stamping in Tijuana, only if you had last stamped in Tijuana.
Did you last stamped in Tijuana? Because Rule is just changed.
NEW RULE:
http://www..com/experience/readentries.do?category=22
You can have H1B stamping in Tijuana, only if you had last stamped in Tijuana.
hot tattoo irthday wishes love.
gc_in_30_yrs
09-12 07:20 PM
If you are on bench, not getting paid, your employer normally asks you to send him a letter stating that you are on vacation. This needs to be done every month. For the period you are on vacation, there may not be any pay stubs. Once you get any project, you will send your employer another letter saying that you are back and ready to work for them.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
more...
house greetings birthday love heart
copsmart
06-15 02:52 PM
Given below are my case details.
Paper Based – Sent to Phoenix Lockbox, rerouted to CSC
Mailed Date : May 18th
Delivered Date : May 19th
Received Date : May 20th
Notice Date : June 1st
1st SLUD : June 2nd
2nd SLUD : June 9th
3rd SLUD : June 10th
4th SLUD : June 11th
No activity since last SLUD… My EAD expires in August. Has anyone noticed similar SLUD pattern on their case lately?
I would really appreciate if CSC/WAC applicants post their case status updates.
Thanks!!!
Paper Based – Sent to Phoenix Lockbox, rerouted to CSC
Mailed Date : May 18th
Delivered Date : May 19th
Received Date : May 20th
Notice Date : June 1st
1st SLUD : June 2nd
2nd SLUD : June 9th
3rd SLUD : June 10th
4th SLUD : June 11th
No activity since last SLUD… My EAD expires in August. Has anyone noticed similar SLUD pattern on their case lately?
I would really appreciate if CSC/WAC applicants post their case status updates.
Thanks!!!
tattoo quotes on irthday wishes.
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIELM_RvuDUjoXWH7ax_4DYEj_xCyMhDFqc3GHk-TZbb-_KtCs0VUJH3ad-kcnc53rB6TZjNRHobjJ0SgTIC0oWS2Dn27mBzm7-N0OSNkjmu7UcDQGNKGIRt1PoTmDO0m7A17QiWk-0E/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIELM_RvuDUjoXWH7ax_4DYEj_xCyMhDFqc3GHk-TZbb-_KtCs0VUJH3ad-kcnc53rB6TZjNRHobjJ0SgTIC0oWS2Dn27mBzm7-N0OSNkjmu7UcDQGNKGIRt1PoTmDO0m7A17QiWk-0E/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIELM_RvuDUjoXWH7ax_4DYEj_xCyMhDFqc3GHk-TZbb-_KtCs0VUJH3ad-kcnc53rB6TZjNRHobjJ0SgTIC0oWS2Dn27mBzm7-N0OSNkjmu7UcDQGNKGIRt1PoTmDO0m7A17QiWk-0E/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIELM_RvuDUjoXWH7ax_4DYEj_xCyMhDFqc3GHk-TZbb-_KtCs0VUJH3ad-kcnc53rB6TZjNRHobjJ0SgTIC0oWS2Dn27mBzm7-N0OSNkjmu7UcDQGNKGIRt1PoTmDO0m7A17QiWk-0E/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
pictures of my irthday wishes.
gcpadmavyuh
10-12 09:05 AM
The maximum time allowed on H1B is 6 years, this includes the time you spent on L1. This is the reason why you have been given H1B that is only valid for 1 year.
On a side note, the maximum time allowed on L1 is 5 years - you had to go back to India since you have spent the maximum allowable time on that visa.
Now, there are two ways to extend your stay beyond the initial 5/6 yrs granted on H1 or L1 visas.
1. For both L1 and H1Bs: Go back to your country (India) for 1 yr after your initial term expires. After 1 yr stay in your home country, you will be eligible for "another cycle" of L1/H1. So, for L1 you will get another 5 yrs, and H1B another 6 yrs.
2. Another way to extend your H1B is to start your Green card process (file your labor, and then your 140). Once your labor is pending for > 1 yr, or your 140 is approved, you will be eligible for 1 yr or 3 yr H1B extensions. This does not apply to L1s.
Here is what I would suggest for your case:
Best case scenario: Wait until your 1 yr clock resets, apply for fresh L1A (multi national manager). Once you are in the USA, convince your company to file for your green card in EB1 - multi national manager. The EB1 is almost always current, you can get your GC pretty soon.
This is the best case scenario that I can envision for you.
Alternatively,you can come back immediately on H1, apply for your PERM and 140, and then get unlimited extensions based on your GC being pending.
You can also wait until your 1 yr clock resets and then enter on H1 in Feb 2008, where by you might be able to claim 5 more years on H1B extensions ( a total of fresh 6 yrs on your current H1B). eventually, you will have to file for your PERM and 140 and then get extensions beyond the 6 yrs. I think you will need to file a petition with USCIS indicating the H1B clock reset.
Merely applying for L1A will not invalidate your H1. however, entering on L1A will invalidate your H1b (you can only hold one visa at a time - L1 or H1B). BTW... I guess you can not enter on L1 until you reset your 1 yr clock.
If I were you,I would seriously consider entering on L1A and then filing for EB1 GC. This is the quickest possible route for your GC. Unless, ofcourse, you do not want to be with the company for another year or so because your relationship with the employer is strained.
Dear experts.. Need your advise..
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B. After 5 years period I applied for H1-B and returned to Inida on 1-Jan-07. And I got H1-B in lottery. Below are my queries
1) My I-797 says that its valid for only one year till October 2008. What could be the reason. (Because I stayed 5 years in US? )
2) So is it advisable to go to stamping after 1-Jan-08? Or can I go for stamping now? I don't want to be in a situtation where I'll b given Visa till Jan'08?
3) Now my company wants to apply for L1-A. What happens to my current H1-B if L1 is applied?
Assuming applying L1 is not going to be invalidate my H1 papers,
4) If I go for L1 stamping, will it invalidate my H1-B papers?
5) If I come to US on L1, is it possible to change status to H1?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
On a side note, the maximum time allowed on L1 is 5 years - you had to go back to India since you have spent the maximum allowable time on that visa.
Now, there are two ways to extend your stay beyond the initial 5/6 yrs granted on H1 or L1 visas.
1. For both L1 and H1Bs: Go back to your country (India) for 1 yr after your initial term expires. After 1 yr stay in your home country, you will be eligible for "another cycle" of L1/H1. So, for L1 you will get another 5 yrs, and H1B another 6 yrs.
2. Another way to extend your H1B is to start your Green card process (file your labor, and then your 140). Once your labor is pending for > 1 yr, or your 140 is approved, you will be eligible for 1 yr or 3 yr H1B extensions. This does not apply to L1s.
Here is what I would suggest for your case:
Best case scenario: Wait until your 1 yr clock resets, apply for fresh L1A (multi national manager). Once you are in the USA, convince your company to file for your green card in EB1 - multi national manager. The EB1 is almost always current, you can get your GC pretty soon.
This is the best case scenario that I can envision for you.
Alternatively,you can come back immediately on H1, apply for your PERM and 140, and then get unlimited extensions based on your GC being pending.
You can also wait until your 1 yr clock resets and then enter on H1 in Feb 2008, where by you might be able to claim 5 more years on H1B extensions ( a total of fresh 6 yrs on your current H1B). eventually, you will have to file for your PERM and 140 and then get extensions beyond the 6 yrs. I think you will need to file a petition with USCIS indicating the H1B clock reset.
Merely applying for L1A will not invalidate your H1. however, entering on L1A will invalidate your H1b (you can only hold one visa at a time - L1 or H1B). BTW... I guess you can not enter on L1 until you reset your 1 yr clock.
If I were you,I would seriously consider entering on L1A and then filing for EB1 GC. This is the quickest possible route for your GC. Unless, ofcourse, you do not want to be with the company for another year or so because your relationship with the employer is strained.
Dear experts.. Need your advise..
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B. After 5 years period I applied for H1-B and returned to Inida on 1-Jan-07. And I got H1-B in lottery. Below are my queries
1) My I-797 says that its valid for only one year till October 2008. What could be the reason. (Because I stayed 5 years in US? )
2) So is it advisable to go to stamping after 1-Jan-08? Or can I go for stamping now? I don't want to be in a situtation where I'll b given Visa till Jan'08?
3) Now my company wants to apply for L1-A. What happens to my current H1-B if L1 is applied?
Assuming applying L1 is not going to be invalidate my H1 papers,
4) If I go for L1 stamping, will it invalidate my H1-B papers?
5) If I come to US on L1, is it possible to change status to H1?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
dresses your warm irthday wishes!
crystal
06-15 03:33 PM
My wife has changed her status from H4 to F1 in last
year. She will be on F1-studies till July mid
of this year. Few weeks back she got her EAD for her
F1-OPT, which will start on Aug 15 of this year.
As I am going to file AOS for her and also EAD, will
she able to work on her OPT-EAD till she gets her
I-485 EAD? Or She need to wait till she gets her
I-485 EAD to work?
As far as I know she need to wait till she gets her EAD of 485.
I sent a mail to lawyer he did not respond yet.
She is going to meet her international advisor on this sometime next week
, but he does not seem to be an expert in this area.
any ideas on this one?
year. She will be on F1-studies till July mid
of this year. Few weeks back she got her EAD for her
F1-OPT, which will start on Aug 15 of this year.
As I am going to file AOS for her and also EAD, will
she able to work on her OPT-EAD till she gets her
I-485 EAD? Or She need to wait till she gets her
I-485 EAD to work?
As far as I know she need to wait till she gets her EAD of 485.
I sent a mail to lawyer he did not respond yet.
She is going to meet her international advisor on this sometime next week
, but he does not seem to be an expert in this area.
any ideas on this one?
more...
makeup irthday wishes love. Birthday
a_yaja
06-25 10:34 AM
I though such contracts are illegal in US?....It is employment at will.....that means they can kick you out anytime or you can leave anytime....maybe someone can clarify
It is "at will". But employers can have what is known as a "termination" clause. This clause can be anything (as long as it is legal):
- You cannot quit and join a competitor within 2 yrs
- You have to return all money paid for relocation if you quit within one yr
- You have to pay all costs associated with GC processing if you quit within 2 yrs
It looks like "2 yrs" is the max. time allowed by the law.
As long as the terms are reasonable, it will stand in the court of law. However, stuff like "you cannot do any programming for 2 yrs after quitting" will not hold in the court of law, because the agreement is preventing you from earning a livelyhood - which is illegal.
It is "at will". But employers can have what is known as a "termination" clause. This clause can be anything (as long as it is legal):
- You cannot quit and join a competitor within 2 yrs
- You have to return all money paid for relocation if you quit within one yr
- You have to pay all costs associated with GC processing if you quit within 2 yrs
It looks like "2 yrs" is the max. time allowed by the law.
As long as the terms are reasonable, it will stand in the court of law. However, stuff like "you cannot do any programming for 2 yrs after quitting" will not hold in the court of law, because the agreement is preventing you from earning a livelyhood - which is illegal.
girlfriend Exchange happy irthday wishes
spicy_guy
08-10 02:30 PM
By other poster...
"Some people already know about this bill introduced on July 1 by John Shadegg (AZ)
H.R. 5658 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase competitiveness in the United States, and for other purposes.
Link: H.R.5658: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/show)
go to the link and click and write to you local representative to consponsor and suppor this bill and pass this bill.
If congress passes this bill it would increase the available EB visa numbers and will make life easy for lots of indian and chinese citizens.
Good Luck
And thanks"
"Some people already know about this bill introduced on July 1 by John Shadegg (AZ)
H.R. 5658 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase competitiveness in the United States, and for other purposes.
Link: H.R.5658: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/show)
go to the link and click and write to you local representative to consponsor and suppor this bill and pass this bill.
If congress passes this bill it would increase the available EB visa numbers and will make life easy for lots of indian and chinese citizens.
Good Luck
And thanks"
hairstyles wishes advance sms love with
stirfries
12-02 01:27 PM
Thanks SS777 !!!
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
My attorney finally received the AP documents on hand, 16 days after the online status had changed to "Document Production or Oath Ceremony".
At least, now I don't have to think about postponing my Tickets !!!
Hope it works out for all you folks !!!
Good Luck !!!
Thanks,
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
My attorney finally received the AP documents on hand, 16 days after the online status had changed to "Document Production or Oath Ceremony".
At least, now I don't have to think about postponing my Tickets !!!
Hope it works out for all you folks !!!
Good Luck !!!
Thanks,
logiclife
10-26 04:35 PM
For people familiar with how databases work:
You have to realize that each page load means a query has to run to a table of 14,000 records (for 14,000 threads) in MySQL database on our limited capacity server and since you have to sort the rows on basis of most recent updates, you have to get all 14,000 rows of result set and then let database sort them in descending order.
The reason for messed up sort order is that the "recent forums posts" has been pointed to a separete table that has recent threads and that seperate table is populated every 1 or 2 minutes from entire table of threads. That's sometimes you update a thread and it takes a while for it to become most recent thread.
For some reason, and we dont know yet, our site has been over loaded. This used to happen during July bulletin and we did the same work around by pointing "recent forum posts" to a smaller table populated thru a stored procedure running every few minutes. Also, during the July bulletin, we upgraded the server processing capacity and doubled the memory. It may be time to upgrade again, or maybe its time for some tune-up with regards to creating an index on the table for threads.
For people not familiar with Databases:
The messed up sort order on "recent forum posts" is by intention an its a work around to avoid site crashes that we have been having due to reasons we dont know yet.
You have to realize that each page load means a query has to run to a table of 14,000 records (for 14,000 threads) in MySQL database on our limited capacity server and since you have to sort the rows on basis of most recent updates, you have to get all 14,000 rows of result set and then let database sort them in descending order.
The reason for messed up sort order is that the "recent forums posts" has been pointed to a separete table that has recent threads and that seperate table is populated every 1 or 2 minutes from entire table of threads. That's sometimes you update a thread and it takes a while for it to become most recent thread.
For some reason, and we dont know yet, our site has been over loaded. This used to happen during July bulletin and we did the same work around by pointing "recent forum posts" to a smaller table populated thru a stored procedure running every few minutes. Also, during the July bulletin, we upgraded the server processing capacity and doubled the memory. It may be time to upgrade again, or maybe its time for some tune-up with regards to creating an index on the table for threads.
For people not familiar with Databases:
The messed up sort order on "recent forum posts" is by intention an its a work around to avoid site crashes that we have been having due to reasons we dont know yet.
kisana
04-11 04:27 PM
Can any one who has used e-file , please advice for my last two questions.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire