If enforcing employee rights kills the employment program, then it stands to reason that the program is built on the premise of them being exploited and therefore shouldn't exist, at least in the form it does.

A lot of those bullet points could and perhaps should be shuffled around and the terms changed, but not in a way where the employees are more or less tethered to the company.

As a counterpoint to my own argument, one could argue that those programs let people escape even worse living conditions, so I guess it could be exchanging a greater form of oppression for a lesser one, which is still better than nothing.

If employers can't employ in the spirit of the H1-B, which to my knowledge is hiring top talent around the world that can't be found domestically, without putting them in golden chains: maybe the program should be killed.

I don't want to be too hyperbolic, but this has the same vibes of "but freeing slaves will impact the economy!" IMO businesses that can't operate ethically shouldn't be encouraged.