Tag Archives: H-1B visa

Immigration Blog

Senate Hearing Sends Signals for Immigration Reform

5 Comments

Similar to a House hearing held earlier this year, a July 26, 2011 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security hearing pointed toward agreement on the need to enact fixes to the employment-based green card system.

Committee Chair Charles Schumer (D-NY) titled the hearing “The Economic Imperative for Enacting Immigration Reform,” hoping to encourage such legislation to move forward in Congress. The hearing contained a remarkable amount of economic data and arguments in favor of liberalizing U.S. immigration laws, particularly in favor of allowing in more highly skilled immigrants.

Robert Greifeld, CEO of the NASDAQ OMX Group, testified, “Our world view must change to recognize that employers no longer have to locate jobs and workers because of physical capital requirements. Human capital is now highly mobile. The work product of STEM and other knowledge workers is just a plane ticket or an internet connection away.” He said NASDAQ supported “stapling” a green card to graduates of U.S. universities with a science, technology, engineering or math degree, and also support establishing a new visa for entrepreneurs.

Brad Smith, general counsel and senior vice president, legal and corporate affairs at Microsoft, noted the company had thousands of job openings for highly skilled positions. He also cited a 2010 University of Washington Economic Policy Research Center study that found Microsoft’s hiring of U.S. citizens, permanent residents and foreign nationals combined to create a “multiplier effect” creating 267,611 jobs in 2008 in Washington. “Through this multiplier effect, every job at Microsoft supported 5.81 jobs elsewhere in the state economy.”

Compelling Testimony on Green Card Backlog
One of the best things a Congressional hearing can do is put a human face on a problem. Dr. Puneet S. Arora, born in India and now a practicing physician in Los Angeles, CA, testified at the hearing on behalf of the organization Immigration Voice. Dr. Arora said though he had lived and worked in America for 15 years – and has two U.S. citizen children – he does not have permanent residency. He explained that due to the low annual quota for employment-based green cards combined with the per country limit, which affects potential Indian immigrants the most, he has been waiting years for permanent residence. In fact, he estimated it might be an additional 8 years of waiting before he could receive a green card.

The Old and the New
Hearings are often a way to gauge the views of members of Congress, particularly new ones. We have not heard much about their views on high skill immigration from either Senator Al Franken (D-MN) or Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). By their questions and comments it appeared both are sympathetic to high skill immigration, particularly the plight of long-term green card holders. Senator Franken engaged in a long discussion with Dr. Arora, praising him for his previous work as a physician in Minnesota.

Veteran Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL) were less sympathetic. Senator Grassley said in a statement, “As part of the solution to America’s immigration problem, some policy makers have proposed the idea of giving immigrants a green card upon graduation . . . While it is important to keep the best and the brightest, getting a degree from a U.S. institution should not equate to a fast track to citizenship for all. Should this happen, the demand for enrollment in U.S. universities by international students would only increase and further erode the opportunities for American students.” He also discussed his efforts to encourage U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to root out fraud in H-1B and L-1 visas.

Senator Sessions scolded supporters of business immigration on the panel, saying they should not have supported comprehensive immigration reform legislation back in 2007. Sessions said he favored a point system similar to Canada’s. Under a point system, there would be no employer sponsorship and most family immigration categories would be eliminated. Instead, the government would set a maximum number of immigrants allowed in during a given year and award permanent residence only to those who achieve a specific number of points. The points would be determined based on characteristics such as age and education level.

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said that a point system would take power away from individual employers to hire and sponsor the foreign-born employees they think are best and instead turn those decisions over to a bureaucratic government body. As a conservative Republican who often expresses skepticism of the federal government’s ability, Sessions seemed to understand the criticism, though did not appear to change his mind.

Reform Ideas
It appears the case was made that there is greater consensus on moving forward with reforms on employment-based green cards than on H-1B temporary visas. In fact, one of the risks for employers remains that efforts to liberalize green card quotas will be met by attempts to restrict temporary visas, such as H-1B and L-1. In addition, there are those who oppose narrow fixes to the immigration system, viewing smaller bills as a possible drain on efforts to achieve a broad comprehensive approach that deals with illegal immigration as well. These types of competing interests continue to make immigration reform a challenging proposition.

India-US Relations Blog

Yesterday, once more?

Leave a comment

And just like that, the much awaited, once postponed India-US Strategic Dialogue came and went, with not even the the tiniest frisson of excitement of that had accompanied previous Dialogues. Minders on both sides must have been secretly pleased that the Murdoch slugfest in London came in as a suitable excuse to explain away the limited interest and analysis of the Strategic Dialogue in the media. With new lists of grievances building up on both sides to replace the long-drawn out lists of the Cold War era, the Strategic Dialogue process has had the unintended consequence of focusing attention on these issues for which all available political capital has been expended or there is no solution even at the highest political levels.  Given this reality, the reports of half-hearted wagging of fingers and admonishments behind closed doors were more for the benefit of respective constituencies than to move the process forward. The overriding urge to prevent any SNAFUs meant that Mrs. Clinton proposal to visit Kolkata as part of itinerary was shot down by the hosts. And whilst Mrs. Clinton broke bread with all her leading interlocutors, from the Prime Minister downwards, the glaring exception was Defence Minister A K Antony, for whom the Dialogue that was to take place in April had been postponed since he was ostensibly busy with the Kerala elections.

01-1The U.S. side, in particular, has become a master at the art of coming out with comprehensive factsheets laying out the massive advances in joint projects, emphasizing the width and breadth of the partnership.   With many of the bilateral agreements signed over the years stuck at various stages of implementation, it is almost as if both sides were virtually scrapping the bottom of the barrel this time around to come out with agreements on cyber security cooperation and cooperation in aviation safety. This is not to belittle the importance of these agreements, and particularly the one on cybersecurity. However, the impression one gets is that there is still a sufficient amount of mistrust on both sides to ensure that even this initiative will live uptoits potential for some time to come. By way of comparison, the agreement between cyber adversaries Russia and the United States on cyber security cooperation signed just the previous week is much more specific on actions and timelines.

But it is not as if Mrs Clinton would be particularly disappointed by either the dampened expectations or outcome of her visit. From an American perspective, given the flux in the wider Asian region, accelerating the strategic partnership with India in the security and defence realms, especially if it is only on the back of unilateral concessions, will only fetch diminishing returns. One only needs replace India with the U.S. in the previous sentence to come up with the Indian view. On the American side, there is reasonable confidence that an increasingly powerful and belligerent China will eventually drive India into U.S. arms. In the meantime, there is plenty of other fish to fry, particularly when it comes to pushing the economic and people-to-people aspects, part of larger initiativesthat Mrs. Clinton has focused on since taking up stewardship of the State Department.  And therefore it is not surprising that out of the many factsheets brought out by the Department at the end of the visit, it is those on economic ties and education and people-to people ties that have the most substance. While the former leads with talks on a Bilateral Investment Treaty, there is a consolation prize in the establishment of the first ever Consular Dialogue to take place on July 25 “for a full discussion of visa and other consular matters”. From Tri-Valley to the harassment of H1B visa holders and diplomatic pat-downs, there will be much to discuss at this Dialogue. Considering that a similar Consular Dialogue has been part of the EU-IndiaStrategic Dialogue since 2000 and the India-Australia Dialogue more recently,one wonders why this did not come into being earlier even earlier.

On the education and people-to-people front, the noteworthy developments are the publication of the first request for proposals under the aegis of the Obama-Singh Knowledge Initiative with the fields of focus being Energy Studies, Sustainable Development, Climate Change, Environmental Studies, Education and Educational Reform, and Community Development and Innovation. How different this Initiative is from existing programs being carried out under the India U.S. Science and Technology Forum remains to be seen.  The other interesting program to watch out for would be the newly launched Passport to India which will facilitate increasing number of American students to come to India for periods ranging from three weeks to six months, to match the 100,000 odd Indian students in the United States. This, too, has an economic focus since the students will be here on internships with companies rather than for study programmes.

The silver lining in this particular cloud might be this; with both sides forced by exigencies to dial down the relationship a notch, this provides some breathing space to consolidate the initiatives that have been taken up in previous years. The U.S. State Department Inspector General’s office  has recommended that a separate office be established for India since “nations of comparable importance and with important bilateral relationships, such as China, Russia, Cuba, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, have their own offices”. A similar initiative on the Indian side would go a long way in implementing the many worthy initiatives of the Strategic Dialogue and make it less of the annual junket that it is being perceived to be.

Immigration Blog

What Do Employers Find on U.S. College Campuses?

Leave a comment

Policy toward employment-based immigration is often mired in accusations that companies ignore U.S. citizens in the recruitment process. In reality, the issue is not companies hiring foreign nationals instead of Americans. It’s that when companies recruit on college campuses they find a high proportion of students in important disciplines are foreign nationals.

In 2007, U.S. universities awarded about half of master’s degrees and 73 percent of Ph.D.s in electrical engineering to foreign nationals, according to the National Science Foundation. Patents produced by foreign nationals are indicators that international students completing their studies not only make up a large proportion of new potential entrants to the labor market but also end up producing important innovations.

As Tables 1 and 2 show a substantial percentage of fulltime graduate students at U.S. universities in important fields are foreign nationals on student visas. Such visas do not allow an individual to stay and work in the United States long-term. To work for years in the United States an international student generally would need an H-1B visa.

Table 1

Percentage of Foreign Nationals in U.S. Graduate School Programs

in Selected Fields (2006)

Field Percent of Fulltime Graduate Students with Foreign

Student VisasTotal Fulltime Graduate Students with Foreign Student VisasStatistics

60.8%

1,960

Economics (except agricultural)

59.6%

5,966

Computer Sciences

58.4%

16,801

Cardiology

50.0%

16

Physics

45.9%

5,707

Chemistry

40.7%

7,712

Mathematics/Applied Mathematics

39.4%

4,862

Pharmaceutical Sciences

36.8%

1,650

Radiology

31.5%

58

 

Source: National Science Foundation/Division of Science Resources Statistics, Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering. Tables 18 and 21 of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering: Fall 2006.


                                                                                    Table 2

Percentage of Foreign Nationals in U.S. Engineering Programs (2006)

Field Percent Fulltime Graduate Students with Foreign Student Visas Fulltime Graduate Students with Foreign Student Visas
Petroleum Engineering

83.9%

543
Electrical Engineering

68.2%

18,683
Mining Engineering

56.9%

103
Agricultural Engineering

56.6%

505
Industrial Engineering

56.5%

3,625
Mechanical Engineering

52.4%

6,640
Chemical Engineering

52.1%

3,241
Metall./Matl. Engineering

51.7%

2,390
Engineering Science

48.0%

795
Engineering (other)

44.6%

1,830
Civil Engineering

42.5%

5,554
Aerospace Engineering

39.3%

1,327
Biomedical Engineering

34.4%

1,948
Nuclear Engineering

33.0%

300
ENGINEERING (TOTAL)

54.1% 

47,484 

Source: National Science Foundation/Division of Science Resources Statistics, Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering. Tables 18 and 21 of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering: Fall 2006.


In computer sciences, statistics and economics, international students made up 58 to 60 percent of the fulltime graduate students on U.S. campuses in 2006. In mathematics (39 percent), chemistry (41 percent) and physics (46 percent) the proportion of international students in graduate programs is also significant. In graduate level engineering programs in the United States, 47,484 of the 87,818 fulltime students (54 percent) were in the U.S. on temporary student visas in 2006.

When an employer recruits at a U.S. college and finds an outstanding international student a company can file for him or her to be on OPT (Optional Practical Training) for 12 months, with the possibility of an extension for an additional 17 months. At some point in that process, the individual could be hired on an H-1B visa, if one is available. If the individual was educated outside the country or OPT is not appropriate or the best option for that person, the employer would generally attempt to hire them directly in H-1B status.

Depending on their size, U.S. employers hire either all U.S. workers or some combination of Americans and foreign nationals. When companies recruit on campuses, they find a high percentage of foreign nationals in key fields. To ignore all these candidates because they were not born in America would concede many talented individuals to competitors. It would be difficult for companies to remain successful with such a policy.

Immigration Blog

A Brief History of Indian Immigration to the United States

1 Comment

So much attention is paid to current policy controversies that it is easy to lose sight of history. The history of Indian immigration to the United States is, to put it simply, recent history. I’ve put together data that show the stunning change in Indian immigration to America after the 1965 act removed the national origins quotas U.S. law. The data show that more Indians immigrated to the U.S. in the 1960s than had immigrated in the prior 140 years.

Immigration from 1820 to 1959

The history of Indian immigration to the United States can be divided into two periods. The first period is the time prior to the 1965 Act. The second, after the change in U.S. law that opened the door to immigrants from India and other countries that had been mostly barred as countries of origin for U.S. immigration.

Table 1 illustrates that few people from India came to the United States in the 19th century or the first half of the 20th century. For much of that period, arduous and expensive travel likely acted as a limiting factor. Between 1820 and 1959, only 13,363 Indians immigrated to America, compared to over 69,000 in 2010 alone.

Prior to 1921, immigration to the United States was essentially open, with some literacy and health requirements introduced in the early 1900s. However, the 1921 and 1924 immigration acts sought to exclude immigration from eastern European, Asian, and African countries. Anti-Semitism in the period made Jewish immigration and, to an extent, immigration from Italy, the primary targets for exclusion, more than the relatively small amount of immigration from either Asia or Africa.

Table 1

Indian Immigration to the United States: 1820-1959

Year Immigrants from India
1820 to 1829 9
1830 to 1839 38
1840 to 1849 33
1850 to 1859 42
1860 to 1869 50
1870 to 1879 166
1880 to 1889 247
1890 to 1899 102
1900 to 1909 3,026
1910 to 1919 3,478
1920 to 1929 2,076
1930 to 1939 554
1940 to 1949 1,692
1950 to 1959 1,850
Total 13,363

Source: Table 2, 2010 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security. Note: Country designation is by country of last residence.

The 1965 Act Changed Everything for Indian Immigration

Under the 1924 Act, which requires a separate, more extensive discussion, immigration from the “Asia-Pacific triangle” was limited to an overall ceiling of 2,000. As a result, extensive immigration from India was not possible. It should be noted that Congress legislated various exemptions from the quotas that enabled individuals to immigrate outside of the quotas.

The 1965 Act made several changes to U.S. immigration law but the most important was to eliminate the national origins quotas. Table 2 shows the dramatic change produced in Indian immigration as a result of the 1965 Act. One can see how Indian immigration has climbed post-1965. From 1960 to 1969, 18,638 Indians immigrated to the United States, in the 1970s, 147,997 immigrated. Indian immigration totals increased as well in the next three decades.

Table 2

Indian Immigration to the United States: 1960-2009

Year Immigrants from India
1960 to 1969 18,638
1970 to 1979 147,997
1980 to 1989 231,649
1990 to 1999 352,528
2000 to 2009 590,464
Total 1,341,276

Source: Table 2, 2010 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security. Note: Country designation is by country of last residence.

Table 3 shows that from 1950 to 1959, America received only 1,850 Indian immigrants. In contrast, from 2000 to 2009, 590,464 Indians immigrated to America. The 1965 Act, combined with the rise of Indian students and employment-based immigration to the United States, produced a dramatic change in the number of people coming from India to America.

Table 3

Indian Immigration to the United States: Pre- and Post-1965 Act

Year Immigrants from India
1950 to 1959 1,850
2000 to 2009 590,464

Source: Table 2, 2010 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security. Note: Country designation is by country of last residence.

Immigration Blog

A Closer Look at H-1B Numbers

Leave a comment

H-1B temporary visas for skilled professionals remain in the news as commentators note the relative decline in use of the visa as compared to previous years. According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, H-1B petitions filed for FY 2012 are indeed running below earlier years. (See Table 1.)

Table 1

FY 2012 H-1B Cap Count

Cap Type Cap Amount Cap Eligible Petitions Date of Last Count
H-1B Regular Cap 65,000 15,200 6/13/2011
H-1B Master’s Exemption 20,000 10,200 6/13/2011

Source: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Past Years: Which Companies Have Used the Most?

One source of controversy on H-1B visas has been the number of Indian companies featured among the top H-1B users. While the federal government has not released a complete list of H-1B employers for fiscal year 2010, some press outlets have obtained a top 12 list. Table 2 below shows that Infosys, an Indian company, was at the top of the list. Cognizant was second, Microsoft third, followed by Wipro, IBM India, Accenture, Larson & Toubro Infotech, Satyam, Mphasis and Deloitte. Google and Patni America were number 11 and 12 on the list.

Table 2

2010 H-1B Approved Petitions: Top Ten Employers

Company Petitions Approved in FY 2010
Infosys

3,792
Cognizant

3,388
Microsoft

1,618
Wipro

1,521
IBM India

882
Accenture

506
Larsen & Toubro

333
Satyam

224
Mphasis

197
Deloitte Consulting

196

Source: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Although the H-1B limit was reached in both FY 2009 and FY 2010, total approvals can differ each year. An application is generally counted in the fiscal year it is approved, rather than the fiscal year the H-1B professional starts working. In other words, a new H-1B approved on May 1, 2010 will be tabulated for data purposes in fiscal year 2010, even if the individual will not start working until October 1, 2010, which begins fiscal year 2011. That may explain why the FY 2010 numbers are higher than FY 2009 for petitions for new H-1Bs (rather than existing H-1B visa holders changing employers or having their status renewed).

Table 3 shows a list of the top 30 employers of new H-1B petitions approved in FY 2009. Wipro tops the list, followed by Microsoft, Intel, IBM India, Patni Americas, Larsen & Toubro, Ernst & Young, Infosys, UST Global and Deloitte Consulting. The list of the top 30 companies is more revealing than only a top 10 list, since one can see a wider variety of employers in the 11-30 range. For example, well-known U.S. companies such as Cisco Systems and Motorola were not in the top 10 but filed for a fair number of petitions for skilled foreign nationals in FY 2009. One also gains a view of the use of H-1Bs by educational institutions, with the Baltimore Public School System, University of Maryland and University of Michigan on the list.

Table 3

Top 30 Employers for New H-1B Petitions Approved in FY 2009 

EMPLOYER

NEW H-1B PETITIONS
Wipro Ltd.

1,964
Microsoft Corp.

1,318
Intel Corp.

723
IBM India Private Ltd.

695
Patni Americas Inc.

609
Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd.

602
Ernst & Young LLP

481
Infosys Technologies Ltd.

440
UST Global Inc. 

344
Deloitte Consulting LLP 

328
Qualcomm Inc.

320
Cisco Systems Inc.

308
Accenture LLP

287
KPMG LLP

287
Oracle USA Inc. 

272
Polaris Software Lab India Ltd. 

254
Rite Aid Corp. 

240
Goldman Sachs & Co. 

236
Deloitte & Touche LLP 

235
Cognizant Tech Solutions Corp.

233
Mphasis Corp.

229
Satyam Computer Services Ltd.

219
Bloomberg 

217
Motorola Inc. 

213
Google Inc. 

211
Baltimore Public School System 

187
University of Maryland 

185
University of Michigan 

183
Yahoo Inc. 

183
Amazon Global Resources Inc 

182

Source: USCIS. Petitions approved for initial beneficiaries in FY 2009

Conclusion

Although India-based companies have populated the top 10 list among largest users of H-1B visas, they do not use the majority of the visas each year. A tabulation of India-based companies has found their numbers have declined significantly since FY 2006. As often the only practical way to hire a skilled foreign national to work long-term in the United States, we can be sure employers of all types will continue to use H-1B visas.