← Back to context

Comment by garbawarb

10 hours ago

Or imagine if an employee works for you and this happens to them.

I've had a couple of reports that this applied to. It's incredibly disruptive. "I've got to fly back to India to renew my visa." "Okay, when will you be back?" "I have no idea, it depends when I can get an appointment. It could be next week, it might be in a month." "[State department] We're pausing all visa appointments." "Well fuck."

Meanwhile I've got a tech lead who is 12 hours away from the rest of the team. He was at least willing to work US-East hours while in India (basically staying up all night and sleeping during the day), but there was a huge amount of management overhead and inconvenience for the employee involved.

  • I've worked at companies where we transfer people to Canada during periods like this in the same time zone. Sometimes they enjoy it so much they don't want to transfer back to the US.

  • At least the procedure used to be that one would try to get an appointment at the US consulate in one's home country and then arrange the trip around it. Also, at least in my experience (but importantly, not with this administration) was that one was never required to leave the US.

    The main constraint is re-entry into the US and being able to travel outside the US. If one stayed here, there was no problem switching schools, programs, jobs, adjusting status to permanent residency or naturalization. On the other hand, for re-entry, one needs a valid visa stamped on a passport which necessitated a trip to one's home country. This stamping visit could be unpredictable.

    Ideally, one would like to travel freely to see family and friends but I see a lot of comments implying that one is forced to leave. It might be true now but a lot of comments here are conflating several issues together.

    • The first time it happened (2023) it was a non-issue; he did exactly as you said, appointment happened as planned, and then he was back on his scheduled plane trip a week later.

      Everything post-2025 has been a shit-show. There's no predictability or clear guidance, either from our lawyers or from the state department.

      Predictability matters a lot in business. If you know what the procedure is and how long it will take, you can plan around it. If the rules change in the middle of the game you're left scrambling to keep up.

      3 replies →

  • Props to your coworker. In my office, they usually just work normal India hours and we have a 12+ hour delay for all communications.

  • Honestly, this is kind of the point. Making foreign labor so unbearably difficult to work with will force companies to hire domestically. At least, hire more domestic workers than they would have otherwise.

  • [flagged]

    • The ad hominem is uncalled for, you don’t know OP’s circumstances, and there’s a lot of presumption in your comment.

    • You are a great person. Thankfully you work at a non-profit and donate all of your money to charity, otherwise if you work for personal profit or company profit you may be a hypocrite.

Hire Americans?

Hundreds of thousands of tech workers have been laid off in the last two years. There are many skilled Americans on the job market. Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States, not as charity to the rest of the world, or as a source of cheaper labor for global employers seeking to undercut American wages.

  • > Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States

    But that's the point, isn't it? Some foreign workers who "worked the US for the benefit of the US" are now unable to come back to the US. Isn't that bad for the US too?

  • It's clear you are not a hiring manager. There aren't thousands of highly qualified engineers looking for work. I can't tell if this a troll post or not.

    • It's clear you are not considering the long-term effects of labor policy. If we want a stronger domestic workforce, the answer is to incentivize Americans to develop the skills we need and to train them when they do not already have those skills. Mass importing foreign labor is not a substitute for building and investing in the domestic workforce.

      3 replies →

    • I’m very pro immigration, but “Americans are lazy and stupid , thus unfit for hiring” isn’t a winning argument.

      Tons of Americans are out of work. I’ve personally seen my wages drop by at least 20$ an hour as well as the work being less stable.

      Gasp, you might need to train someone a bit or have employees that will say no if you ask them to work on Christmas.

      If I ran the H1B program it would be an unrestricted work permit with an automatic pathway to a GC after 5 years. Don’t get *convicted* of a felony and here you go.

    • Hiring is such a shit show, there's no reason to assume the people doing the hiring know what they're doing. Like HR has to insert them selves into the process

[flagged]

  • Of not violating the law? Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a company can't use a candidate's citizenship in hiring decisions.

    • No - that's not right - they can't discriminate against people who have work-status, but they absolutely can discriminate against people who don't have status aka arbitrary foreign nationals.

      And it would be absurd if they could not.

      Also, in some cases, employers should be able to discriminate, it's totally different to hire someone on an n-month visa vs full time.

      Granted, it's different if they are Green Card.

      It's also perfectly normal to want to hire locals, if it can be done on a national basis, then I think for some roles, state ought to be fine as well. If state governments had a state preference for in-state nationals, that would be fine, for example.

      The issue here is by far and away mostly one of transparency and efficiency - the rules should be clear and the bureaucracy should just function normally.

      The fact that anything takes months, or that you need lawyers etc is a sign of dysfunction.

      It should be about as complicated as getting a prescription. 'One trip to an office and done'.

  • Most immigration is based on hiring people into jobs for which the skills don't exist locally, based on what I've read.

    So, yes, they could hire a citizen, but then they probably wouldn't be able to do the job they were hired for.

    • Most immigration is based on hiring people into jobs for which the skills exist locally but which demand higher wages than immigrants. This is called a labor shortage by employers who prefer not to think of it as a salary shortage.

      This is based on my experience in working with good immigrant coders who got the job over about equally capable locals, but more cheaply. The immigrants (mostly Indian and Chinese) tended to have weaker English communication skills but stronger work ethics.

      1 reply →

    • Many job reqs are scams intended to satisfy the "doesn't exist locally requirement" (superficially) so that exploitable foreigners are importable.

      Nobody has 20 years of React experience, of course, but that doesn't stop people from listing this as a requirement - or a pre-selected group of people on the other end from asserting this experience.

    • This is just false. There are lot of reasons people hire immigrants, very few are truly incredible, singular talents. I lived with a bunch of Indian immigrants when in SF and it was universally guys not as skilled as me hired because there was a pipeline for Brahmin to the US.

      1 reply →