There's not a surplus of American developers that can pass interview loops at top tech employers.

They are creating this very surplus by firing 16,000 people who already did. And that's on top of all the mass firings last year.

▲

Sevii 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FAANG has been engaged in mass layoffs for two years now. How can you possibly make the claim that there is a surplus of people who can pass the interview loops? Obviously, there isn't because they are firing people who passed those loops.

▲

drecked 12 hours ago | parent [-]

You’re ignoring the part where FAANG massively overhired in the years preceding.

Meta and Amazon doubled their headcount in the 2-3 years of the pandemic.

Others like Google increased by 60+%.

You’re also forgetting about this little thing popularly called AI that happened in the intervening years.

There may be an argument that H1B isn’t fit to purpose in a post AI world (although that argument is also false if we think software engineering will remain a viable job going forward, but that’s a different topic).

But it’s much harder to argue that H1B hurt US employers when thr industry they hired the majority of H1B employees in the first 2 decades of the 2000s, also saw some of the highest growth in jobs while simultaneously posting the highest growth in salaries (there may have been certain minor industries hiring a few thousand people, like Oceanographer that had a slightly higher increase, but even that was likely not true because BLS data doesn’t factor compensation in the form of stock options which disproportionally provided wealth for SW engineers relative to other workers).

	▲	johnnyanmac 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>You’re ignoring the part where FAANG massively overhired in the years preceding. Yes, because overhiring is a lie generated to justify layoffs. I'd hope by year 3 that we'd see through this. If they "overhired", why is hiring still up globally while down in the US? >You’re also forgetting about this little thing popularly called AI that happened in the intervening years. What about it? Hiring numbers are still up. Its clearly not replacing workers as of now.

▲

varjag 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Quality outcomes of top tech employers are still somehow lacklustre despite all that.

▲

eli_gottlieb 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Then why all the layoffs? You don't fire people you've got a shortage of.

▲

toomuchtodo 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://layoffs.fyi/

The domestic talent exists, and companies can leverage it or be punished financially for attempting to “contain labor costs” through leveraging visa workers.

▲

VirusNewbie 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ok, then hire them on an O-1 visa. H1B is the problem as it creates a indentured servitude class that is going to work for less.

▲

SilverElfin 12 hours ago | parent [-]

H1B workers cost more on average than permanent residents. That’s just based on salary. Once you account for the fees and legal costs and risks of the immigration process, H1B workers are way more expensive. Also, these visas can be transferred between companies.

There’s no such thing as an indentured servitude class here - this is just part of the giant racist misinformation machine of the right, to make it seem like shutting it down would somehow be doing those employees a favor. In reality it’ll hurt the entire country.

	▲	jujube3 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		None of what you're saying is related to what the parent post is saying at all. He's saying, if the immigrants are exceptional, they should be on an O-1 visa, which is specifically designed for exceptional people. If they're not exceptional, then why not hire an unemployed American worker instead? H1B supposedly is designed to address "shortages", but there are no actual shortages.