Financial Times
By Barney Jopson
November 23, 2014
The
White House is projecting that most of the economic benefits from its
immigration reform will come from highly-skilled workers, but
dissatisfied tech groups say the initiative does not
do enough to help them recruit foreign programmers and engineers.
President
Barack Obama used his executive powers last week to remove the
deportation threat hanging over nearly 5m unauthorised immigrants, and
took smaller steps to address longstanding complaints
from Silicon Valley about US visa backlogs.
The
measures for the tech sector are at the heart of White House claims
about the economic impact of its move, but tech lobbyists said the Obama
administration's plans lacked critical details
and had been oversold.
“What
the president is planning to do will buy us more time and enable us to
stay afloat a bit longer, but it doesn’t fundamentally change the fact
the ship is sinking,” said Scott Corley,
executive director of Compete America, a coalition that includes
Microsoft, Google and Amazon.
The
concerns of tech groups are important because, while the administration
claims its action will boost US output by 0.4 to 0.9 per cent after ten
years, 0.3 to 0.7 per cent is supposed to
come from high-skill immigration.
In
particular, the White House expects a big boost to the productivity of
all US workers by bringing in more foreign entrepreneurs and
technologists. Its own figures, however, show the majority
of extra workers will not be new immigrants but the spouses of existing
H-1B high-skill visa holders, who are not necessarily highly-skilled
themselves.
Such
measures do not satisfy tech groups, which have long complained that
the US’s sclerotic legal immigration system is stifling their growth by
stopping them hiring the programmers they
need.
Intel
says that at US universities where it recruits, more than half of
graduates with advanced degrees in engineering, science and maths are
foreign-born but struggle to get work visas or
residency permits. US labour unions dispute claims of labour shortages.
Mr
Corley said: “We believe the president’s commitment, we trust his
sincerity, but we’re not seeing the kind of detail we want to see at
this stage to fully assess what it means for us.”
“For
years Republicans and Democrats have shown the same amount of sincerity
and said that they want to fix the highly-skilled visa system – and a
decade later it’s not done.”
Another
tech lobbyist said industry needs had been eclipsed by the weight of
demands over unauthorised immigrants, a group that arouses great
sympathy in the Democratic base and divides Republicans.
“There’s only so many people and so much time. This wasn’t their priority,” he said.
Tech
groups had urged the White House to free up more permanent residency permits, or green cards, by “recapturing” some 200,000 unused in
previous years, and by not counting family members
towards the annual allotment of 140,000 work-based green cards. But the
White House did not acquiesce.
The
measures it did announce on highly-skilled workers included plans to
allow people who are already in the US on work visas to change jobs if
they have had green cards approved but are waiting
– often many years – for them to become available. It said it would
give some of their spouses the right to work too.
The
Obama administration also proposed to extend an on-the-job training
programme for foreign students of science, technology, engineering or
mathematics coming out of US universities, which
helps companies to recruit graduates. But Mr Corley said the impact
would depend on the details of rules that were yet to be written.
Dean
Garfield, president of the Information Technology Industry Council,
another lobby group, said: “While we appreciate the president’s efforts
to address the problems in our employment-based
system, and look forward to further details, it is disappointing that
neither he nor Congress have been able to seize the opportunity to
accelerate economic growth by fixing our broken immigration system.”
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment