Remix.run Logo
▲ pontus 3 hours ago

Vance said “They’ll put an advertisement in a small-town newspaper. They’ll go out there and say that ‘We have advertised for a position with our company, and nobody is responding to it.’ And they will use that lack of response to then go and replace American workers with what is effectively foreign indentured servants”

My understanding is that this is pretty much how everyone does it, no? Not to say that I'm surprised that they're applying this argument asymmetrically to their allies vs. foes, of course, nor to say that I necessarily agree / disagree with this tactic.

▲esalman 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Here are the rough requirements for said newspaper ad according to DOL:

• The job must be advertised in the print edition of two different Sunday newspapers.

• The newspaper must be widely distributed in the area where the job is located.

• Both ads must run between 30 and 180 days before you file the PERM application.

• The advertisement must clearly state the name of the employer.

• The ad must outline the job duties, requirements, and the work location.

• Listing the wage is optional, but if included, it cannot be below the official prevailing wage.

• Employers must keep the full-page newspaper tearsheets for 5 years in case of an audit.

It doesn't say anywhere that it cannot be advertised in a small town.

▲pandaman 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>It doesn't say anywhere that it cannot be advertised in a small town.

It does say in the law [1]: "there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified (or equally qualified in the case of an alien described in clause (ii)) and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor".

The rules of DOL are just guidelines how they are going to determine this but they are not the law. I will argue that if you are planning to publish your job ads in a small town newspaper you do not believe yourself that there are no "able, willing, qualified and available" Americans for your job.

1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

▲ 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
▲bubblethink 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>I will argue

You, or the government in this case, should argue that in a court of law. So far, the government has not won any of these cases in a court of law. And I mean over the last 2-3 decades. The number of successful prosecutions will be in single digits. It's a bit like voter fraud when it comes to actual numbers.

▲pandaman an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Which cases? What prosecutions? Are you seriously saying that there are no qualified, willing and available workers for random PM or front end jobs and only this particular Indian person, who just graduated from an American college a few years ago is the only one who is able to do the job? I'd love to see a single case like this, got any links?

▲bubblethink an hour ago | parent [-]

The cases where the government has proved in a court of law that a company is in violation of the statute or regulation. I am not aware of any successful prosecutions here other than maybe Cognizant which was in the news some time ago.

▲pandaman an hour ago | parent [-]

What prosecutions of the 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(A)(i) do you mean? It's a clause that says that aliens looking for a job are inadmissible unless there are no qualified, willing and available workers as certified by DOL. It is not prosecuted, aliens are just not admitted. But if you have seen it being prosecuted somehow I am still waiting for a link.

▲bubblethink 34 minutes ago | parent [-]

PERM is approved at a rate in high 90s. The government - this government - has approved PERM for all these corporations that it is slandering now. Here's a deposition from a DOL employee [1]:

"Q Are any PERMs denied for fraud? A Not to my knowledge."

There is a PERM process, the government overwhelmingly approves it, it does not take anything to court or win. I am not sure what you are trying to argue.

[1] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.266...

▲pandaman 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

You are not giving the links to the prosecutions you claimed the government lost.

▲bubblethink 19 minutes ago | parent [-]

I am claiming the government does not prosecute them or deny their PERM. What are you arguing? Can you state it clearly?

▲pandaman 6 minutes ago | parent [-]

You claimed that government does not successfully prosecute this, implying it prosecutes and fails. If you wanted to say it does not prosecute then you should just said so when I asked what prosecution did you mean. Also what are you arguing here? We both agree that inadmissibility does not require prosecution, so what's your point again?

▲buzer 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

They have settled at least one case: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-s...

> Specifically, the department’s investigation found that Apple did not advertise positions Apple sought to fill through the PERM program on its external job website, even though its standard practice was to post other job positions on this website. It also required all PERM position applicants to mail paper applications, even though the company permitted electronic applications for other positions.

Of course court itself could have arrived in different result.

▲bubblethink 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes, they all settle out of court. Everybody makes money and headlines. Companies write it off as the cost of doing business, politician uses it on the campaign trail. Biden sued SpaceX because they weren't hiring asylees. Same shtick.

▲mikeocool 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some of these requirements are so ridiculous that they create the need for everyone to do what Vance is accusing Microsoft of.

Many companies fulfill the intent of the law. They run a real hiring process — where they advertise online and interview people with work authorization/citizens and people who would require sponsorship.

But if someone requiring sponsorship was the best candidate for the job, then they have to run an additional “fake” process that fulfills these requirements, since no one actually hires tech workers from the newspaper.

▲TheGamerUncle an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Considering how many of these adds have more than a hundred of local applicants, and still end up hiring people that are not from North America it is quite clear they do not intend to follow the intent of the law.

Let's be honest they want a captive workforce that depends upon them to stay in the USA and build a life.

There has to be a better way to does not make them captive, and allows Americans to be the first ones, and even after that the priority should be people in North America, even International students.

But the fact they keep hiring mostly and overwhelmingly people from the same five countries that are desperate to come to the USA is an indication these companies are profiting formt he desperation of people.

▲smallmancontrov 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> requirements are so ridiculous that they create the need

It's the other way around. The "need" creates the ridiculous requirements. Companies get the laws they want and the laws they want are those that give them an excuse to do what they want to do.

▲leni536 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Is that really the intent of the law? From here it looks like the intent is to favor citizens to people who would require sponsorship, but a hiring process that selects the best candidate from a single set of citizen and foreign candidates doesn't do that.

▲mbreese 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It also doesn't say that the paper needs to be widely read, just circulated, right? I mean, why pay for a job ad in the SF Chronicle when you can put a cheap ad in the (now defunct?) SF Weekly free paper? When it was still around, SF Weekly would have met the threshold for being widely distributed...

Why pay to reach many thousands of people with a widely read paper when you can pay pennies to reach dozens of people that you don't want to apply to the job anyway?

This is an entire business model.

▲reilly3000 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

“But the plans were on display…”

“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”

“That’s the display department.”

“With a flashlight.”

“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”

“So had the stairs.”

“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”

“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.

Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

▲jareklupinski 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> This is an entire business model.

was this how those 'free newspapers' back around 2005~2010 worked?

▲Spooky23 an hour ago | parent [-]

Yeah. The trade rags from companies like Ziff Davis had a section of plain classified ads that were like 2-4 pages of 6 point black and white text.

▲Karliss 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The newspaper must be widely distributed in the area where the job is located.

Based on that I would expect that if you advertise in small town newspaper, the job needs to be located in that small town. Want them to work in your big office next to big city, then it must be a newspaper widely distributed in that city not a small town on the opposite side of continent.

▲mkatx 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I wonder if wfh creates any loopholes here, and they just select areas where there are no real candidate pools.

▲socializer 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I've seen these ads. Not the latest, some things might have changed, but circa 2015-2018, this is how they rolled:

1. You choose newspapers that are least likely to actually reach people looking for tech jobs.

2. You post an small ad specifying the role in the most vague and unappealing terms.

3. There is some weird and inconvenient way to apply (e.g., fax- or snail-mail-only) that goes to /dev/null.

You can argue that it follows the letter of the law, but as a practical matter, the outcome is always that there are no US-based applicants for any H-1B SWE role, so something is wonky, right?

▲wincy 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Didn’t people start publishing lists of these and people started applying and these HR departments lost their minds?

▲rdtsc 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yup someone started to aggregate those. Corp lawyers probably laughed at their cuteness and then proceeded to obscure the process even more. Say, only publish in newspapers without an online presence, so someone has to physically scan it. Or find a small town where few people in tech live. Also notify the HR department to ensure to flag out all US applications for some other "unrelated reason" that look plausible on paper.

▲throwaway85825 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, jobs.now

▲Melatonic 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Anyone know the list ? Curious to check it out

▲penskymaterial 2 hours ago | parent [-]

https://www.jobs.now/jobs/746649922-android-developer

Here's one for Android Developer.

Must apply by snail mail.

If only they made a device (with an OS perhaps) where one could apply to such things electronically.

▲darkwater an hour ago | parent [-]

Just...wow.

I'm not American and I don't live in the US, and I pretty hate Trump and his allies but this ad is just...wow. I think this is a loophole that should be closed.

▲jonway a minute ago | parent | next [-]

That’s a frustration. People project their hopes and dreams onto Donald Trump, but the president isn’t t a king. The same neoliberal order remains, another war crushing global trade, but still no action taken. Donald Trump did make a lot of crypto money though.

▲buzer 23 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Do note there are similar practices in many (all?) countries. Recently there was one case in Finland where job posting was extremely specific saying "We require, and by that we mean require, not recommend, experience in Leader and EU funding as well at least 14 years and 5 months of relevant experience". Their CEO admitted publicly that it was just done due to them being to public funding and that requires job postings to published. One of the articles (in Finnish): https://www.hs.fi/alueet/art-2000012282918.html

▲ai-x 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not sure there is any advantage in publishing this in a remote town rather than NYC and SF.

Any tech savvy person in NYC or SF would not be scouring newspapers for tech jobs and even if they are, they are most likely to be H1B or Greencard themselves.

A small town newspaper may actually make people apply to those roles.

But either way, people who likely to come through these ads can be easily disqualified just by adding a few technology stacks

▲Karliss 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What's the point of bringing in workers into US just to have them work remotely from home? At that point why not have them work remotely from other side of ocean.

▲MITSardine 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It takes a lot of trust (on both sides) and complexity to establish a working relationship across two jurisdictions, if at all possible.

For instance, what labor laws apply? And who enforces them? And how, given parties in two different countries?

Does the company want to subject itself to some arbitrary country’s tax man or labor law enforcer prosecutions? Does the employee want to work under effectively zero labor protection? Possibly, but rarely.

It’s not even always possible, it’s very complicated to work remotely in France, for instance. The state cracks down on one person one client companies, and EoRs beyond being impractical (as they must adhere to drastic labor laws compared to the US) are in a legal gray zone.

▲lobf an hour ago | parent [-]

>For instance, what labor laws apply?

The laws of the worker's locality is generally how it works. In the film industry, a production company based in LA might do a shoot in NYC- they have to follow NYC's labor laws since that's where the workers are and the work is being done.

The workers at the home base in LA have the LA laws applied to them.

>And who enforces them?

The local government.

▲throwup238 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cultural and timezone alignment. We’ve been here before with the outsourcing wave 20 years ago. The answers are still the same, remote is just a job perk.

▲michaelt 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Before Covid-19, when you asked tech folks about outsourcing to central American countries (or even within the US to places with lower wages than the bay area), the answer would always be "nothing can replace in-person meetings around a real whiteboard"

▲Melatonic 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Taxes probably. And you can bring them in if necessary occasionally.

It's a lot less accounting work to have most of your workers in the same state. Imagine single workers or small groups in many different countries.

▲vanviegen 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Saving half in salaries might make up for some additional payroll complexity.

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲bluefirebrand an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

If they work remotely from the other side of the ocean then they are free to leave and find another job easily without risking their green card

If you bring them to America you've basically created a worker who is dependent on staying employed with you in order to keep their place

▲penskymaterial 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Are you trying to justify the exploitation of this loophole?

Nearly all these ads say "Send CVs to immigration_department@tech.corp" they aren't even trying to conceal what they're doing.

▲literalAardvark 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those are some seriously out of touch requirements that could easily be fixed if anyone in power actually wanted to.

▲kentm 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah, I believe these are the requirements for PERM: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-20/chapter-V/part-656/sub...

They are wildly out of date compared to how jobs are actually filled. Regardless of any other enforcement actions, this needs to be fixed.

I don't think it even needs congressional approval to change these. The DoL could do it.

▲mattm 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Just copying the actual newspaper part here:

(B) Advertisements in newspaper or professional journals.

(1) Placing an advertisement on two different Sundays in the newspaper of general circulation in the area of intended employment most appropriate to the occupation and the workers likely to apply for the job opportunity and most likely to bring responses from able, willing, qualified, and available U.S. workers.

(2) If the job opportunity is located in a rural area of intended employment that does not have a newspaper with a Sunday edition, the employer may use the edition with the widest circulation in the area of intended employment.

(3) The advertisements must satisfy the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. Documentation of this step can be satisfied by furnishing copies of the newspaper pages in which the advertisements appeared or proof of publication furnished by the newspaper.

(4) If the job involved in the application requires experience and an advanced degree, and a professional journal normally would be used to advertise the job opportunity, the employer may, in lieu of one of the Sunday advertisements, place an advertisement in the professional journal most likely to bring responses from able, willing, qualified, and available U.S. workers. Documentation of this step can be satisfied by providing a copy of the page in which the advertisement appeared.

▲kentm 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm more speaking to the point that the options are "newspaper or professional journals" in the-year-of-our-lord 2026. Job sites are under a section that gives a pool of other options of which the employer must pick three. Those requirements should be flipped (job sites are the requirement, newspaper and journals are one of the extra options) if the DoL wasn't asleep at the wheel.

Edit: And thats not a R vs D thing. The requirements have been this way under multiple administrations, and newspapers have not been a primary way of sourcing candidates for two decades.

▲ufmace 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

How to "fix" it depends a lot on exactly what your goals are.

▲LoveMortuus 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Waa! Is that why I'm still unemployed, because I haven't been buying (or reading) newspapers...

▲dawnerd 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I’m sure they’d find a reason to pass on anyone that does apply through those ads.

▲Georgelemental 3 hours ago | parent [-]

But then it is legally hazardous for them to hire the foreigner

▲throwaway85825 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That assumes anyone is actually checking up on this. Enforcement is virtually nonexistent.

▲trothamel an hour ago | parent [-]

Except the point of the original post is that has changed.

▲ an hour ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲UncleOxidant 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The job must be advertised in the print edition of two different Sunday newspapers.

Advertising in the Sunday newspaper seems a bit antiquated. I don't think I've looked in a newspaper for a job since the 90s.

▲hirako2000 19 minutes ago | parent [-]

That's how I have been getting my last 6 jobs.

I never get a reply via indeed and the rest online.

▲simonw 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I heard that this rule is genuinely keeping the lights on for some local print media publications.

▲antonvs 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Socialism with extra steps.

Not that socialism is inherently bad, but why not just be honest about it and implement it more directly?

Who am I kidding, socialism is the bogeyman doing hero's duty sustaining unrestricted ultracapitalism.

▲WheatMillington 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do people still look for jobs in newspapers? I don't think my city (non-American) even has a local newspaper anyore.

▲ an hour ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
▲soerxpso 26 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Please use more than one brain cell in order to consider the intent behind those guidelines, and whether what Microsoft (and similar companies) is doing is actually within the bounds of what voters and the representatives who wrote the relevant laws wanted. Do you really think the purpose of making companies advertise the job opening in a newspaper was just to give companies a bunch of busywork? or might there have actually been an intent behind it? Are you capable of ascertaining what that intent is? (note: this question has a right answer that all people arguing in good faith are capable of stating)

▲ojbyrne 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I would hazard a guess that Microsoft follows this process exactly, and this probably won't hold up in court. But it looks like good midterm fodder!

▲cryptonector 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> • The newspaper must be widely distributed in the area where the job is located.

> It doesn't say anywhere that it cannot be advertised in a small town.

What does 'widely distributed' mean if not "not just in a small town"?

▲kridsdale1 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It could be the Redmond paper in this case. That maybe has a few hundred readers.

▲cryptonector an hour ago | parent [-]

The rule is pretty dumb in a country where people regularly move far for a job.

▲dansquizsoft 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The job must be advertised in the print edition of two different Sunday newspapers

Ah yes, the newspaper, the bastion of where all millennial and Gen Z software engineers deign to get their news from in 2026…

▲siscia 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It doesn't say anywhere that it cannot be advertised in a small town.

I think it is implies in: "The newspaper must be widely distributed in the area where the job is located."

▲nilamo 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

When the job is wfh, the entire globe is where the job is located. Are there any physical rags that are widely distributed globally?

Maybe it's time to rewrite the aged and archaic laws, instead of selectively applying them to a handful of companies...

▲siscia an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Are all the position in Microsoft WFH?

I have several friends who works in Microsoft and would disagree

▲e12e 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If the job is WFH, is green card applicable?

▲nilamo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Why wouldn't it be?

▲e12e 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Because you could... Work from home? In Canada or India?

▲nilamo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Is that supposed to be a downside? I honestly don't see why that would matter. If someone is working for a US company, then they're working for a US company. The flag sticking out of the ground where they sit shouldn't be relevant.

▲in_the_arean 7 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes it is, because America has a vested interest in writing laws to benefit, I don't know, AMERICANS.

American companies are for Americans.

▲brainwad 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But if the job is located in Redmond, does that mean widely distributed in Redmond itself, or the Eastside, or all King County, or the whole Puget Sound area?

▲siscia an hour ago | parent [-]

That's usually what a judge decides.

Anyway, I went checking and I wasn't able to find any opening in Microsoft in the Seattle times online version. Which is definitely not a nice optics and would play unfortunately well with the current allegations

▲bitexploder an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Imagine if they changed the law to reflect what they wanted instead of randomly punishing companies that most likely are doing the same thing everyone else is, but they angered the admin by telling them "no" on some topic.

▲shevy-java 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But why must it be on print? I mean ... does that make objectively sense? I don't even read paper news anymore.

▲Melatonic 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sounds like a good time to start responding to newspaper job ads

▲nonethewiser 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Newspaper!?

▲rayiner 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah, the rules are designed to facilitate fraud. They let you put job ads for web developers in a newspaper instead of, you know, on the Internet.

If the rules weren’t designed from the outset to facilitate fraud, they would have required the company to advertise the position in the same places they advertise their other jobs.

▲ryandrake an hour ago | parent [-]

> If the rules weren’t designed from the outset to facilitate fraud

I wouldn't default to assuming malice. These laws were written by extremely old people who are still living in the 1950s, where they think the paper boy still rides up on his bicycle on Sunday to deliver the news paper to them, and that's the only way to read about jobs.

▲garbawarb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, these are literally the guidelines provided by the DOL. And the government seems to want to punish companies for following the exact published guidelines.

▲Neil44 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Oh come on, if a company is placing job ads to comply with the letter of this law in 2026 they're 100% exploiting the process Vance outlines and would undoubtedly try to exploit whatever the replacement process was as well.

▲bialpio 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Nothing prevents the administration from changing the law then, last time I checked their party holds all three branches of government + SCOTUS.

▲adamrezich 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Are we referring to the same administration that is met with immediate resistance from an activist judiciary whenever it tries to do literally anything?

▲jameshart an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Passing a constitutionally valid law through congress and then having the executive branch enforce it would not meet any judicial resistance.

I suspect the courts would welcome it.

▲thfuran 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe they should stop trying to do illegal things.

▲jimaway123 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article317504545.html

▲adamrezich 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is this thing they're doing illegal?

▲goatlover 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Why would you give this administration the benefit of doubt?

▲bialpio 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

No, just selective enforcement and maybe sending a message that if you don't behave, the administration may look a bit harder into you than it normally would.

▲rayiner an hour ago | parent [-]

What is the evidence of selective enforcement?

▲bathtub365 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Following the published guidelines is not exploiting them. If the government doesn’t like their own guidelines, they should change them.

▲sjducb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Agreed, if a company wants to fill roles it advertises on linked in. Maybe the rules need updating.

▲IAmBroom 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Where "100% exploiting the process" means complying 100% with the standards.

▲setr 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Ethereum has “code is law”, but we can still have a notion of the code being exploited, because it is the intent that’s been exploited

▲QGQBGdeZREunxLe 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really. Meta had to change advertising to allow online applications.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-labor-depart...

▲la6479 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Just vote bank politics. Microsoft is not a cheap sweatshop. If it is a sweatshop and still producing what it produces then that defies logic. We can only expect more of these as mid terms approaches.

▲CGMthrowaway 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If anyone needs an example of this happening, here is one from yesterday. Netflix is advertising a fully remote $750K software engineering job in the Seattle Times classifieds but the same job isn't listed on their career website: https://x.com/JobsNowPR/status/2107816460634784094

▲vconnor 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is there no better source (perhaps a link to the Seattle Times Classified) than an image on Twitter from a political account?

▲calculatte an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Exposing the corporate fraud is political? Or is it just political because it uses US symbolism to expose US jobs at US companies being kept from US citizens?

▲raphman an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Quick search:

The same ad appears here: https://www.jobs.now/jobs/746612360-software-engineer-ref-10... and here: https://jobs.ieee.org/job/software-engineers/86091567/

Applicants are asked to send their resume to usresumes@netflix.com

FWIW, there are multiple job offerings for software engineers both in Seattle and remote on the Netflix page. Just not this one.

https://explore.jobs.netflix.net/careers?location=Seattle%2C...

The ads on Netflix' own website look quite different. No salary range but much more information about the job. And there is an application form to be filled out. The job ID has a different format.

(There is also another short ad for a Broadcast Operations Engineer: https://www.jobs.now/jobs/518941865-broadcast-operations-eng... )

AFAICT, the email address usresumes@netflix.com only appears online in conjunction with these very brief job ads on small job sites. It seems quite obvious that these ads are not really meant for serious candidates.

If one sends an email to usresumes@netflix.com, one receives the following automated reply. That does not necessarily mean that Netflix posted the above ads.

----------------------------------------

Thank you for your interest in Netflix!

So what happens now? Our hiring team is currently reviewing your application and should we find your background to be a fit for this role, we will be in touch.

We are always looking for stunning colleagues to join our team and do amazing work. So remember to check out our job site regularly as we are growing and adding openings often!

Thanks, Netflix Talent Acquisition

https://jobs.netflix.com/candidateprivacy

----------------------------------------

Not sure what to make of this. Either Netflix is very brazen here - posting minimalistic job adverts where they don't want anyone to apply - or someone else is posting these to further their own agenda.

▲nonethewiser 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Classified ads change.

▲nyorai 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Does that change anything in the message being conveyed?

▲IAmBroom 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, it's the difference between a partisan claim and a fact.

▲nonethewiser 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah but links to their job site and the ads arent evidence because the underlying data changes over time.

▲Capricorn2481 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Aliens are eating our pets"

"Is there a credible source for that"

"Does that change the message I'm conveying?"

▲noncoml 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Let’s put our pitchforks down and think for a moment.

Do you really think that Netflix has a preference for non-Americans?

On one hand we say they chose Americans to pay less money on the other hand we see this absurd amount of money for a remote job

Why? Because this is not them looking to fill a position but rather trying to get a PERM for an employee that they are already happy with. We don’t even know if it’s H1B or L1

Not saying that the H1B program doesn’t have its problems, but this is not the case of let’s fill this job with non-Americans for less pay

▲nonethewiser 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>Not saying that the H1B program doesn’t have its problems, but this is not the case of let’s fill this job with non-Americans for less pay

What do you think happens to wages when the supply of labor decreases?

▲happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why can't it just be Netflix wanting to choose from a larger pool?

▲Saline9515 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The US market isn't a pool large enough? Why don't they publish the ad on their website then?

▲ 2 hours ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
▲mistrial9 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

netflix advertising for a $3000+ dollars a DAY is like advertising for an Olympic athlete.. this is a distorted example in several dimensions.

▲tanseydavid 18 minutes ago | parent [-]

"Oh sorry...That's a typo the newspaper made. The position is actually 75K/year" </sarc>

▲TMWNN 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>Do you really think that Netflix has a preference for non-Americans?

Netflix as a whole, no.

Ethnic Indian Netflix people whose departments suddenly become 100% ethnic Indian, yes.

▲noncoml an hour ago | parent [-]

Wow… Racist much?

▲testuser1984 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Cheap labor

▲harshalizee an hour ago | parent | next [-]

how is a job with a salary of $750k "cheap labor" anywhere on earth?

▲testuser1984 an hour ago | parent [-]

Should be 1 mill minimum

▲alexalx666 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

lol, because smart people only born in US

▲onetimeusename 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've seen it done in not even a small-town newspaper. A company I worked for put it into a print newspaper I cannot even find anywhere and I suspect the lawyers who we used to help in the process owned it themselves (but I can't prove this). I am not sure if there is a set definition of what a small-town newspaper is or "widely distributed". Like what if lawyers print it once a month/year and just distribute it around public parks or something? Is that widely distributed?

This isn't even a good basis. The question is what the purpose of visa to residence work programs achieves. No one ever questions the underlying assumptions. Like for example, could filling skilled roles actually cause a self fulfilling prophecy? If Americans assume immigrants will fill a role, they don't acquire the skill which actually creates a dependence on immigration to fill it.

▲bsuvc 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The question is what the purpose of visa to residence work programs achieves

It achieved wage suppression and control over workers livelihood.

And it should be illegal, perhaps even criminal the way some companies go about it.

▲GranPC 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That reminds me of the Richards Tip episode from Nathan for You, in which, in order to fulfill a legal requirement for a name change, they started printing a newspaper called The Diarrhea Times.

▲TulliusCicero 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not a Republican, but if this is accurate, it's something that these companies (or individuals in these companies) should be prosecuted for.

▲darth_avocado 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s because the companies are following a flawed process, not that they’re committing fraud.

The PERM process is flawed because it puts the onus of proving a need for international labor in the market on the company instead of doing it at a government level. Say in the market, you have 1000 jobs available for a role, but 900 US citizens available for doing the job. If the companies want to fill the 100 positions with non citizens and provide them to a path for permanent residency, they have to prove that no US citizens are available by advertising the position and hiring for it.

In a theoretical state, none of the 900 candidates will apply for that job because they are already employed. In reality candidates move around, so the test they ask companies to conduct is flawed.

I know people get emotional on this matter but they don’t understand the process. IMO all of this can be avoided if the labor market tests are managed centrally like a lot of countries do. You evaluate the shortage, fill those roles and then update the statistics to reflect that the shortage was filled.

▲john01dav 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This model assumes that the number of positions is fixed at any given time, but that is not true. Instead, it will fluctuate based on what must be paid. So, to extend your example, without H1B or a similiar program or de-facto state that does the same thing, then we'd get roughly the 900 jobs that are willing to pay the most to be filled, while the rest are not worth the cost of employing someone in this hypothetical market. The result, then, is a higher wage for those 900 citizens.

This is not to say that such programs are bad. To consider that, we must ask questions like:

- Is citizens being able to make much more than non-citizens a desirable outcome? (it's electorally incentivized, since citizens can vote in the relevant elections but non-citizens can not but that is not the same as being desirable in a more broad sense) - How big is this effect? - How badly do we (meaning society at large) want these final 100 jobs done? - How will this affect competition with other countries? - What about outsourcing?

▲darth_avocado 3 hours ago | parent [-]

A labor shortage has a temporary effect of creating an upward pressure on the 900 jobs, but there’s a ceiling and the long term effects are complex. I may have to pay 900 jobs 1.5x to attract and retain the talent as a business, but that cost will be eaten by other functions where there’s a surplus. Or long term, the businesses will find ways to either automate or ship the jobs away.

Additionally there will be a loss in productivity for business and the 900 jobs will have more work on their plates, so in a way they could be underpaid for the job they do. This is just scratching the surface, but I assume there’d be a lot of second order effects.

▲PorciiVorbesc 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> the businesses will find ways to either automate or ship the jobs away

Both are acceptable terms for me compared to importing cheap labor. If they automate, then at least it creates new high end jobs, and if they ship jobs away then they now have to deal with foreign cultures, foreign courts and legal system, etc that will hamper their business.

▲darth_avocado 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That’s because you’re automatically assigning “cheap labor” tag to all workers on visa. Which in itself is not accurate. But these same workers after following the above process become permanent residents and citizens. (Which implies these are the people companies want to retain and move them off a visa by sinking 10s of thousands of dollars) The reality is much more nuanced.

▲eweise 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nope. Companies are just taking advantage of the system. Just look at who the biggest importers are. Tata Consulting? I mean that's clearly just cheap tech labor. I once was contracting and had to train my replacement from Infosys who was there on an H1b visa.

▲darth_avocado an hour ago | parent [-]

This about the PERM process and Microsoft. Consultancies abusing H1B visas is problematic, there’s no denying that. But this is a separate matter.

▲junofan 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I know people get emotional on this matter but they don’t understand the process.

This kind of “logic”—the process is broken, therefore it’s okay to cheat—isn’t very popular with Americans.

▲penultimatename 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They elected a president twice that says he was being “smart” by avoiding taxes. Americans are fine with this logic.

▲ 2 hours ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
▲darth_avocado 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So anyone following the immigration process laid out by the government is cheating?

▲georgemcbay 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> This kind of “logic”—the process is broken, therefore it’s okay to cheat—isn’t very popular with Americans.

Especially because when such processes are broken they usually got that way not on accident, but because of sustained lobbying by the same forces that then take advantage of the broken system they helped to shape.

(I'm speaking generally, not necessarily claiming it applies to the particular policy being discussed here, which I'm not super familiar with the history of one way or the other).

▲lowbloodsugar 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The companies lobbied for this process. It's flawed by design. If ti worked as you suggest, then companies couldn't exploit their workers.

▲OrvalWintermute 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

TLDR;

They were committing fraud fraud fraud

We need clawbacks from the C-suite and disgorgement of illicit profits

▲curiousllama 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

100% happens. Microsoft is for sure an offender, but the biggest offenders are companies like Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture, and IBM (among others).

There's a whole business model of US-citizen managers, H1B front-line employees, and offshore support staff. They flood the H1B lottery, crowding out (imo) more deserving high-skill folks. Was really insane to see.

IMO, going after sketchy practices like this is a MUCH better approach than reducing the volume of H1B employees.

▲00d9e3 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If you are ever at a tech company and oddly see a piece of paper taped to the wall near the ceiling with microscopic font, that is a job posting. Its representing the tech company making their 'best effort' to hire an american. You can't make this stuff up.

▲ticklemyelmo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It really sounds like you just did.

▲00d9e3 11 minutes ago | parent [-]

Paypal in the 2010s. San Jose Campus. On a bulletin board with some other mandated employee notifications. Never saw this at any other company.

▲hurtbaseball an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, exactly. I don't think Microsoft's hiring 6K foreign workers is really the problem. It's companies like Accenture and their shady practices. I've seen entire departments of American workers laid off only to be replaced by Accenture through H1Bs. This is just a publicity stunt from the administration. If they really cared about this issue, they would work with congress and update their antiquated immigration laws regarding foreign workers.

▲curiousllama 6 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yea, the technical details of visa policy do not exactly seem like the focus here - though they should be.

▲kentm 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> They flood the H1B lottery, crowding out (imo) more deserving high-skill folks.

I really wish this was quantifiable in some way -- I have no way to tell if this statement is accurate.

I've worked with some very skilled H1B that definitely deserved to be here. If companies like Infosys or Cognizant are taking "slots" that could be filled by people like those H1Bs, then I'd consider that a big problem. Companies like these are not doing "highly skilled" work.

Edit: I kinda wonder if the "highly skilled" value judgement is a holdover from the era where people thought you were a genius if you touched a computer.

▲curiousllama 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> "If companies like Infosys or Cognizant are taking "slots" that could be filled by people like those H1Bs, then I'd consider that a big problem."

It's hard to get data, but this is precisely what appears to me to be happening.

There's a limited number of slots by country. These companies specifically target those slots. I've worked with these folks (who are wonderful people, to be clear), and also had multiple friends with very niche, in-demand skills need to leave the country.

I don't have the data, but at a micro level, the system does appear to simply be set up backwards.

▲rayiner 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Remember that H1B is a lottery. If you are skilled you will be around the skilled people who won the lottery. But most of the jobs aren’t going to those people. The lottery treats a job at Google and a job at WiPro as being the same in terms of odds.

▲buzer 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> The lottery treats a job at Google and a job at WiPro as being the same in terms of odds.

This actually changed this year. Applicant gets 1-4 tickets depending on their pay relative to job/area. So $500k Google engineer has quite a bit higher chance than $100k WiPro one.

Of course it still has issues (Google probably has 1-2 possible applicants for that position and would prefer all of them, Wipro has 100 and cares more about what % of them pass).

▲jselysianeagle an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If you are skilled you will be around the skilled people who won the lottery.

But it's a lottery that's truly random then there's no reason to believe that those that won the lottery would necessarily be highly skilled, right?

Anecdotally, over the course of my ~15 yrs of experience in the industry, I've definitely met some brilliant people on H1-B visas but I'd put that estimate at around ~30% or so, the rest were just people of average skill / talent doing work that a US citizen could be doing.

Again, just my personal observation, others may have wildly differing estimates based on places they've worked at.

▲hajile an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If H1b were about getting the most talented, it wouldn't be 75-80% from just one country and another 10% from a second country. I'd expect it to be very evenly distributed.

▲rayiner 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

I would expect tons of H1Bs from former soviet bloc countries that have incredible math and science education. The fact that the H1B program isn’t clogged with Russians and Ukrainians is evidence something is amiss.

▲novok 5 minutes ago | parent [-]

You'll notice it follows a population distribution of the world, with higher weighting from less developed countries. Soviet bloc people are not a high %age of world population and also tend to be captured more by europe since it's closer. People from developed countries tend to have less incentive to move on top of that. Indians have a further advantage of already knowing english on top of that and you get our current distribution of mostly people from india, china, canada (proximity, easy TN visa and english), europe with significant slavic representation and then everywhere else in the tech industry.

▲rayiner 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean that each employer petition on behalf of a worker is selected randomly. But, prior to the petition, the workers are hired by the companies in a non-random fashion. That’s important to keep in mind because I think a lot of people are like “oh the H1Bs I met working on AI at Google are super smart, so the program must bring over the best of the best.” But the system treats an H1B petition from WiPro the same as one from Google. Because the system is a lottery, it can be true that there are super smart H1bs working at Google and also that most of them are doing jobs many Americans could be doing. The lottery system makes the bar quite low and the spread very wide.

▲kentm 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Fair. I think there's a discussion to be had on whether it should be a lottery, but I don't think that discussion is feasible in the current political zeitgeist.

▲Invictus0 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The people that deserve the jobs are Americans. It doesnt matter if a foreigner is more skilled--the American people don't want to complete for jobs in a global labor market.

▲gessha an hour ago | parent [-]

What is an American if not a temporarily foreign worker ;)

▲0l 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Read the report, these WITCH companies are also included ;)

▲flutas 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's fairly accurate.

It's a controversial site simply because of what it's targeting but "jobs [dot] now" surfaces a lot of these newspaper ads that they catch, and also highlight crazy (in the modern day) stuff like "send your resume via mail to this address to apply" or at times even custom job boards that only have the PERM roles on them when the company has a completely different board for all others.

▲throwitaway222 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's rather insane that you have to state that first - don't you think?

▲cael450 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I get it. Like 90% of the Republicans platform is the dumbest policies imaginable. It’s like saying you agree with a bunch of drunk, belligerent, clowns. You’d want people to know that you don’t paint your face and piss your pants too.

▲mangodrunk an hour ago | parent [-]

You really think that the democrats are much better? It seems like they are more concerned with their image than actually doing anything. Or if they do, it seems like they are more interested in the symbolic aspect of it and to perpetually keep the problem, such as how they deal with homelessness.

▲mcrowder65 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I used to work for corp Walmart and they’d do H1B postings on a wall which would list salary and stuff. I don’t think they’d post it anywhere else

▲OptionOfT 3 hours ago | parent [-]

This is for the PERM. The labor certification that you cannot find an American to do the job and thus your employee should be granted a green card.

▲cryptonector 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

One should not have to disclose one's politics to make such a comment. IMO. That means that we should not think "smells like a Republican, so ignore them!".

▲bubblethink 2 hours ago | parent [-]

One shouldn't pay heed to any comments one way or another that are prefaced with "I am X". They are thinly veiled attempts at appealing to people's base emotions.

▲cryptonector an hour ago | parent [-]

Or -more likely- they reflect fear of being judged for their political views as inferred by others. But yeah, it could be manipulation! "I'm not an X but <opinion voiced by people who are X>" could be a purposeful way to push views held by people who are <X>.

▲anukin 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

These companies are going to bribe the govt for h1b. They thrive on cheap labor provided by h1b and the whole masters to h1b pipeline via opt.

▲rmah 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That's not really how corruption in the US works.

▲snoman 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This happens. It’s the SOP, but it’s because they already have someone doing the job on a work visa and they don’t want to have to fire them and hire/train someone else.

It’s not necessarily a green card problem (ok it is, but…); it’s more of a visa problem.

▲iknowstuff 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's literally required by the government's PERM process

▲IAmBroom 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can't prosecute someone for following the law verbatim.

▲behringer 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If Republicans started prosecuting crimes there'd be no republican politicians left.

▲antonvs 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Wait, you're saying the party of law and order... isn't?

▲andrepd 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You did not respond to the point.

> they're applying this argument asymmetrically to their allies vs. foes

If a law is on the books, but it's only applied to a specific set of people in a retaliatory fashion, then it's worse than not being applied at all.

▲doug_durham 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The "replacement of an American" is where the narrative breaks down. Traditionally we haven't had large numbers of unemployed developers. One of the consequences of the the Dot Com bubble bursting is we lost an entire generation of native-born engineers. People weren't going in to CS. At the same time there was an explosion of software positions. This is part of what fed the increasing use of H1B talent. This was also one of the sources of the bootcamp phenomenon. Things are bit more dynamic these days. This is just a nativist, anti-immigrant move.

▲happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent [-]

>This is just a nativist, anti-immigrant move

Yes, but what is the implication of the word "just"?

▲yesb 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's only kind of accurate. It has to be 2 newspapers in the area the person is employed in. Hard to prosecute them for following the rules they are given.

The rule is the job has to be posted with the state workforce agency, 2 Sunday newspapers, and 3 other recruitment methods (mostly at the company’s discretion). PERM is basically a retention tool as h1b is temporary otherwise. Obviously they are going to choose the 3 methods least likely to produce good candidates. As with most immigration issues, it could be trivially fixed by Congress but won't be.

▲geodel 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Hard to prosecute them for following the rules they are given.

Well if that's how one want to proceed. Fine. In that case these companies are not really prosecuted. Government is just doing fraud prevention out of abundance of caution.

▲bubblethink 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

DOL requires the ad in the newspaper. Vance also said Haitians were eating cats and dogs. Let's not get carried away by things Vance says.

▲jimt1234 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Vance actually admitted the "eating cats and dogs" thing was BS, but said it was okay because it helped "advance the narrative".

▲in_the_arean 8 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> My understanding is that this is pretty much how everyone does it, no?

This is not alarming to you?!

▲proteal 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A place I used to work advertised a job by posting the listing in the break room, where only people with badges could get in to see the advert. Maybe there were ads elsewhere, but if that was the only posting, it felt against the spirit of the law.

▲bathtub365 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That is actually not complying with the law. The law says it has to be in at least two newspapers.

▲QGQBGdeZREunxLe 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Internal job postings are not unusual.

▲IAmBroom 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> but if that was the only posting

"I saw a thing once, and I'm going to wildly guess some incriminating details, and then claim it's proof of some sort."

Even Vance does a better job of manufacturing outrage than that.

▲ecshafer 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Another way to look at it is that they are going after particularly notable fraudsters that have very high visibility and perhaps perpetrate it at a higher rate.

▲cosmicgadget 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Based on its track record, I don't think the administration is "going after" anyone in good faith. This is just a way to compel Microsoft to do something beneficial to the guy in charge.

Or he's trading off of it.

▲kpw94 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> they will use that lack of response to then go and replace American workers with what is effectively foreign indentured servants

Wait but PERM process is precisely for getting that foreign person outside of the temporary "effective indentured servant" phase. It's to get a green card... Once you have it you can leave the company and work anywhere.

Where it gets maybe abused is only India/China pipelines, where they're stuck in that GC backlog for years. so it makes them in this limbo of renewable H1B until the GC is granted, which might be decades out.

▲neaden 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But to be real, does this really matter? Do any software engineers or other positions Microsoft is looking for in these examples look for jobs in the paper these days? Would they get more responses if they advertised in a larger paper?

▲soerxpso 21 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Microsoft is banking on the fact that nobody looks for jobs in the paper. The point is to use the lack of response be able to write on paperwork that they've proven that no qualified jobseekers exist in the US. They are aware that advertising in the newspaper is not an effective way to fill a position; the goal is to lie about how much they tried.

▲Wingman4l7 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It's compliance theater. They can claim they technically complied with the requirement to search locally for applicants first.

▲billnad 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I remember years back, I was maybe 5 years into being a sysadmin and saw that Microsoft was hiring, at the time they said that they expected high proficiency in the following.... And listed every piece of software they produced. It was ridiculous then and probably the same thing is the case now.

▲IAmBroom 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That's more likely to be a terrible hiring manager. I've seen that at smaller companies, too.

If they change the ad between the local newspaper and the foreign search, they would be breaking the law. That's not what is claimed, even by Vance.

▲ummonk an hour ago | parent [-]

The point is that only someone already working there would have proficiency with all the software they use internally, so by listing those as requirements they can ensure no external candidate is eligible for the job the green card applicant is doing.

▲zabriel_goss 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Really a bizarre workaround. It's not even restricted to these massive entities.

I flew into a co-working space for a team onsite this summer. While walking the halls, I saw a job posting printed out and taped onto a glass door facing out from one of the single-occupant offices, surely to claim a similar approach.

▲YawningAngel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://volokh.com/2013/02/05/perils-of-prosecutorial-discre...

I was reminded of this article

▲senderista an hour ago | parent [-]

Very on-topic, reminds me of some analysis of why Putin and Xi generally tolerate corruption among their subordinates: it allows them to purge anyone they want with plausible deniability, since everyone is on the take.

▲motbus3 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is there any evidence of that claim by Vance? I am not trying to be confrontational but this claim is so outstanding that it pulled my attention. How did his people got it to a level that they prove it is systematically abused. I am not saying it is being abused or not. I am literally curious on how anyone in the face of earth could do that to a point that you can prove it is not an isolated event.

Anyone, best of luck for people.

(Imo, anti immigration is the easiest way to cut ties with other nations if you plan to send your boys in there to get a trauma)

▲anvuong 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is a very well known tactic in H1B factory like Tata and Cognizant, people has been complaining about this for years. Not sure about Microsoft though.

▲motbus3 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm sorry. I am not saying you are lying. Please don't take like this. But if someone wants to audit this to prove it, how would they do? Because if they are just exploiting a hole, why not fix the hole?

▲geraneum an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Why aren’t they trying to change the laws of h1b, etc. while they have control of the all branches of the government and instead just target certain companies? Why not just close the loopholes, assuming there is systematic abuse, so no one can abuse the system anymore?

▲testuser1984 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Newspaper is ONE of the requirements. It needs to be posted across 5 sources. 2 mandatory and 3 of 10 other recruitment options.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-20/part-656/section-656.1...

▲cryptonector 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Law enforcement when a law is widely violated often involves 'making notable examples' of a few cases to scare the rest into compliance, no?

▲AngryData 23 minutes ago | parent [-]

Generally they just focus on cases that are the most profitable and easy to prove.

▲eunos 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The right supposedly hates big gov, weaponized gov, regulating gov unless it's related to foreigners

▲g9yuayon 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wonder why Microsoft is singled out. Shouldn't companies like IBM and Cisco are gross offenders?

▲geodel 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No need to wonder, Top offenders like Tata, Infosys, Wipro, Cognizant all listed.

▲redler 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Presumably somebody didn't get paid.

▲mattm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those are literally the rules of what you need to do. Well, except the small-town newspaper part. Pick up the Sunday San Francisco Chronicle and you'll see pages of these ads.

▲happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is one of those horrible moments that happen once every decade or two for me:

Somebody I believe is spiritually hideous, morally corrupt, and plain old incompetent, saying something I am in atomically perfect alignment with, using almost the exact same words I would.

▲cosmicgadget 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Unfortunately due to the corruptness and incompetence, you're almost certainly getting nothing beyond this headline.

▲mrwh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Even a stopped clock!

▲medellin 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is why i voted for him and will keep doing so. The left is too weak to push through things like this with their “morally superior” voters. So, your welcome.

▲cosmicgadget 2 hours ago | parent [-]

What is the 22nd Amendment even?

▲thatfrenchguy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Once you have a green card you also are not indentured anymore :)

▲RajT88 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Indeed. I had a friend who worked in freight forwarding - Japanese company, him a Japanese citizen, but based in US.

Once he got his green card via lottery, his pay went up and his mandatory overtime went down. His Japanese coworkers without green cards still had to work late.

▲legitster 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For nearly every job title that an H1B is brought in on, they are paid more than the prevailing average wage. The idea that they are coming in as underpaid foreign scabs is mostly a myth.

Burying job listings is part of the kabuki theater, but it's being misrepresented here. Usually companies already have a candidate in mind when they do this. It makes no sense to run a complete hiring process in the US, and then turn around and run a second one for international candidates. You may as well do a complete candidate search and then post the canned jobs again if you need to get Visa sponsorship.

▲ericmay 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> For nearly every job title that an H1B is brought in on, they are paid more than the prevailing average wage. The idea that they are coming in as underpaid foreign scabs is mostly a myth.

Source? But also what difference does that make? Just pay American workers more.

▲legitster 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's literally baked into the H1B law was confirmed by a congressional report on the program: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/O...

> Just pay American workers more.

If we set aside software engineering - 40% of rural doctors in the US are here on H1B visas. There's not a "pay them more" button we can hit that generates more domestic doctors, especially not in under 10 years. All you'd do is compete amongst a limited supply.

▲rgbrenner 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> There's not a "pay them more" button we can hit that generates more domestic doctors, especially not in under 10 years.

That's literally how the button works. An undersupply in the market, increases prices.. kids and students deciding what they want to do with their life, see the wages and decide 10 years of school is worth it... and after 10 years you get more doctors.

If there's an undersupply, that's a clear indication that young people are looking at the field and deciding the wages don't justify the investment.

By short-circuiting the process of the free market, you're guaranteeing the shortage will continue.

▲mywittyname 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As an American who grew up in one of these underserved markets, you couldn't pay me enough to work there. My mom works at a rural hospital and loathes every minute of it. The reality is, American workers value more than just dollars. Especially professionals with options.

Immigrant doctors may also hate working at these facilities, but the prospect of raising their family somewhere in the USA is a huge value add for them.

▲ericmay an hour ago | parent [-]

> As an American who grew up in one of these underserved markets, you couldn't pay me enough to work there.

Eh I think this is sort of BS. First yes literally you could be paid enough. Everyone has a price, including you, and you’re not fooling anyone. Second you can find arrangements that perhaps enable you to spend a few years doing what amounts to public service in exchange for maybe no debt or higher pay and then move on - this is a very common thing in the labor market.

Also, what does that say about you that you hate being around your fellow countrymen more than someone from outside of your country?

▲legitster 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I really don't think this is true.

The problem is that the relationship is non-linear. The data shows that at a certain amount of comfort and income, most people really aren't willing to make drastically uncomfortable lifestyle choices for any amount of money. I'm not suddenly going to become a lineman even if it pays double what I make now.

How many kids in our culture are actually looking at earning potential as the #1 factor when they choose a career?

▲oatmeal1 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The pay for doctors does not matter for recruiting more doctors when the bottleneck is residencies.

▲pinneycolton 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There actually is a pay them more button that the federal and state government controls, but I doubt they'd hit it. Many of those rural docs are compensated heavily by Medicaid (EDIT: have a high % of Medicaid patients - compensation is a separate story), but the reimbursement structure often penalizes those rural docs vs. those that take positions in suburban and urban environments. Some states permit a flat reimbursement structure where patient volume is the only difference, but other states further penalize the rural docs by "shaping" reimbursement rates such that more funding goes to the urban and suburban areas.

This administration could address that, but if anything, they seem to be moving in the opposite direction.

▲angmarsbane 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Rural medical specialists are compensated very well. In my experience the bigger obstacle to getting those roles filled is more social, for example, unless you are already married the dating pool in a rural area is a consideration for new doctors, or if you are married and your spouse has a career moving to a rural area may require them to give up that career which they may not be willing to do. Cities better support dual-career households b/c they have a density of industries. Also - after 10+ years of school a lot of new doctors want to live it up a bit in a place with things to do and see.

▲unrented7977 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sure there is, we can make school affordable.

▲hajile 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

And stop degree inflation. A doctor with 4 years of med school and a year internship from 60 years ago can diagnose your sniffles or refer you to a specialist just as well as a doctor with an unrelated 4-5 year BS degree then 4 years in med school, then a year of internship followed by 3-4 more years of residency.

At the same time, the doctor with just 4-5 years of school and hundreds of thousands less debt can not only treat patients more cheaply, but will have more years of practice too.

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲bubblethink 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That would be like DEI for American workers, no? Not to mention, discrimination based on nationality is illegal.

▲ericmay 40 minutes ago | parent [-]

> That would be like DEI for American workers, no?

No for a couple of reasons which you’re aware of. Plus liberals say DEI is good so they can’t be against it.

> Not to mention, discrimination based on nationality is illegal.

Sort of - but you’re taking a narrow view here. We discriminate (nothing wrong with that, all countries do it) who we let in to the US for example. Many universities had or have de facto race quotas, and by being an American you can’t be discriminated against as a nationality outside of being an American. Let’s say you are Chinese American. You’re American, not Chinese. There isn’t anything to discriminate against. Welcome to team USA. All the way baby. But if you aren’t an American then we just decide what we want to do with you and whether it fits our needs or we send you back home or whatever.

▲bubblethink 12 minutes ago | parent [-]

The parent was asking to "just pay Americans more". That is just illegal.

▲estebank 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It is literally a requirement for that kind of Visa.

> Employers must attest to the Department of Labor that they will pay wages to the H-1B nonimmigrant workers that are at least equal to the actual wage paid by the employer to other workers with similar experience and qualifications for the job in question, or the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment – whichever is greater.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/immigration/h1b

▲mrwh 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes and no. Why is the prevailing wage what it is, and how does bringing more supply in affect the prevailing wage? There are secondary effects.

▲legitster 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> There are secondary effects.

There are also tertiary effects in that bringing in young working families into the US is overwhelmingly good for the economy.

If bringing in workers shrinks an economy, then how does one go from a country of 40 million to 400 million without 360 million people being unemployed? Because wage earners actually contribute more to the economy than they crowd out.

No one in their right mind would argue that having kids is going to put downward pressure on the job market, and yet we have the idea that grown, educated adults will. (Not to mention these grown, educated adults cost us nothing in taxes in education or retirement, so overwhelmingly less of a burden on our economy)

▲ZebusJesus 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

100% as someone who sponsored someone yeah they are and the government kind of wants you too

▲zer00eyz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have worked with a lot of H1B's in tech.

I have not met a single one who was not over qualified for the job they were doing.

I have only met a couple who were (to some extent) getting screwed because of an agency in the middle. However I would not have found the wage unreasonable and the markup was well within the industry standard.

H1B is a path to import talent that mostly wants to stay here... We need to fix the portion of the process where it is onerous to go from H1B to green card and citizenship.

▲happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

My experience and sincere belief is that your experience is not representative.

▲ericmay 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> H1B is a path to import talent that mostly wants to stay here...

There is truth to this, certainly. In software engineering or related positions? I don’t think so, generally. If this was the case we wouldn’t also outsource positions.

▲zer00eyz an hour ago | parent [-]

> If this was the case we wouldn’t also outsource positions.

Invert your argument: If outsourcing was so great, we wouldn't have any software jobs in the US.

The reason to outsource, to offshore are far more nuanced than "cost".

▲ericmay an hour ago | parent [-]

That’s not the inverse though. I didn’t claim outsourcing was bad.

▲lowbloodsugar 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've met hundreds.

▲lowbloodsugar 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Speaking from personal experience, this is not true. Myself and every H1B I know was paid significantly below the prevailing wage.

▲ajkjk 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah this system has been very stupid for a very long time.

▲Jcampuzano2 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This has honestly been one of if not the only thing I have agreed with the Trump administration on. It also seems like something that has had bipartisan support (at least among the general public), but nobody wanted to rock the boat on these companies that provide so much funding in the form of "donations" and lobbying.

Abuse of the H1B system is pretty widespread if you look at the types of roles that these companies submit applications for. I'm convinced that if you aren't looking for someone who is literally a PhD candidate, lead of their field you can probably find someone somewhere who can write a damn REST API.

▲failbuffer an hour ago | parent [-]

Trump was defending H-1B a year ago even as his immigration crackdown was shifting into high gear. This is simply a pre-election move that will likely be reversed by the administration or the courts.

▲roosterIllusi0n 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And this announcement changes nothing. Why only mention microsoft when they aren't even the worst of them? Tesla put out a tesla semi factory video a few days ago and most of the people in it were foreigners on visas.

This looks to be a shakedown for cash. Companies are retaining existing h1bs and not hiring new, so this "change" is coming at a meaningless time.

I think people should be asking why JD has eye shadow on as if he just came from a drag party. The guy looks like a clown and is making a meaningless announcement to fake out the maga base for the election. The h1b announcement from last year still hasn't changed anything. The lottery is still maxed out.

▲mvc 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What's wrong with people who live in small towns?

Some of us know just as well as folks in San Francisco how to instruct claude to write code.

▲dzhiurgis 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Are you surprised by allies vs foes in politics?

▲taude 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This would actually probably be acceptable to me if they multilaterally applied it across all tech companies, not just the ones who don't kiss Trump's butt.

▲FrustratedMonky 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is. Maybe this is just executing one criminal to send a message to all the others. If they can take on MS, they can take on anyone.

▲superxpro12 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Applying that standard uniformly is just good government.

Selectively applying that standard to advance a specific cause is fascist.

▲baggy_trough 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, that is an accurate statement by him. As with many things, corruption and fraud in the visa process have grown over time and are mostly unremarked upon.

▲yesb 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's not very accurate, they need to be newspapers where the person is employed. It's the government that is behind the times with respect to how people find jobs. And it's not really "fraud," it's simply companies working in their own interest within the existing outdated rules.

Besides newspapers, they have to be posted with the relevant state workforce agency and 3 other methods. It would not be hard to require that one of those needs to be the company career site or wherever the majority of recruiting comes from.

▲stdgy 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh, well if it's just companies being horrible I guess that's okay.

▲cromka 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Agreed. As an ex-immigrant to US who's gone through this process, credit where credit is due: Vance exactly described how this process looks like.

US needs a modern, merit-based immigration system. No lotteries of any kind, be it the de-facto lottery for H1B or actual Diversity lottery.

▲whstl 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Thanks for sharing. It is interesting to see the perspective of people who have personal experience with the system criticising it.

Someone else above also mentioned wages being lower, someone else mentioned working overtime.

▲buriram 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲pandaman 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The article is lying by omission, it's not just Microsoft, which got suspended from PERM, FT has a list of few other companies (it's paywalled by searching for the article title and clicking the result link works [1]). Also, this is not something extraordinary: big companies get suspended from PERM all the time.

1. https://www.ft.com/content/5cfecbba-69ed-42d0-98fd-3ae019144...

▲happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, you are of course correct, lots of large businesses do this, and hopefully they extend this scrutiny to all businesses.

I'm not sure what about this made you question your intuition. Is there something about this story that made you think it might only be Microsoft doing this?