New York Times
By Liz Robbins
October 27, 2015
Decades
ago there was a hit song in India, “Chitthi Aayi Hai,” a tear-jerking
anthem about mothers mourning the loss of sons who went to school abroad
and never came back.
The
tune has changed. “It used to be by default students from India and
China, in particular, bought one-way tickets over here,” said Vivek
Wadhwa, who has written extensively
on international tech talent. “Now it’s a two-way street. They work for
a few years and go home.”
Mr.
Wadhwa, a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at
Stanford, suggests a reason: After earning their graduate degrees in the
United States, potential entrepreneurs
and programmers are unable to get work visas.
According
to a Brookings Institution analysis, in 2010 only 30 percent of foreign
graduates of U.S. universities received an H-1B visa, awarded to
temporary workers in
specialty occupations. And though 64 percent of all international
students in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM, come
from India and China, they are still subject to the 7 percent cap per
country that immigration law places on green cards.
The wait is so long for permanent residency, many simply leave.
In
what they believe will stimulate innovation and the economy, tech
companies, lawmakers and universities have been urging the
administration to make it easier for international
students to stay in the United States. Thus, the fate of foreign
graduates has become yet another spark in the contentious debate over
immigration reform, prompting a variation on a familiar question: Do
foreign graduates get jobs at the expense of American
workers?
That
is what a technology workers union out of Washington State argued when
it sued the Department of Homeland Security last year over an extension
to its Optional Practical
Training program. OPT allows international students to work for one
year in the United States; in 2008, in response to the recession, the
department had granted STEM graduates an additional 17 months. But the
Federal District Court hearing the suit has ruled
that the department had erred by skipping the formal approval process
and has until February to present its plan for public review, and then
offer a revised rule. Meanwhile, the union, the Washington Alliance of
Technology Workers, has filed an appeal challenging
the legality of the department even making such a policy.
The
OPT extension, opponents argue, represents an end-around to the H-1B visa program that makes it easier for companies to hire low-cost foreign
labor and for some unaccredited
institutions to bring in students for short-term work instead of
education. “I would hope that D.H.S. would say this is a really bad idea
and we should phase this out,” said John Miano, the lawyer representing
the union. “When people are on student visas serving
as guest workers, how absurd is that? They are supposed to be
students.”
Ostensibly,
an OPT extension improves the long odds of being selected in the H-1B
lottery, one of the paths to permanent residency. “A longer OPT might
mean they get two
bites of that apple,” said Ben A. Rissing, a professor at Cornell’s
School of Industrial and Labor Relations. But chances are still slim.
Congress caps H-1B visas yearly at 65,000, with another 20,000 slots for
graduates with advanced degrees. Consider the
crush every April: Last spring, there were 233,000 petitions for H-1B visas within the first five days of their being offered.
Amid
pleas from Microsoft and other tech companies, two bills were
introduced in Congress this year that would eliminate caps on
employment-based visas and ease residency
restrictions for those with graduate degrees — the “green cards for
grads” solution. Both bills are stalled in committees.
In
a letter supporting the Senate bill, 14 associations representing
thousands of higher education institutions described an urgent need:
“According to projections, the
United States will face a shortfall of more than 200,000
advanced-degree STEM workers by 2018,” the associations wrote. “In many
STEM areas, foreign students are a majority of the Ph.D. graduates from
U.S. universities.” It went on to say that the “immigration
system forces many of them to leave, sacrificing the innovation and
economic growth they would create here.”
Or,
as one prominent immigration lawyer, Stephen Yale-Loehr, put it:
“Imagine if the next Google or Facebook were to be developed in India or
China. All those jobs that
could have been in the United States instead are being developed
overseas and competing against our best companies.”
For
labor proponents, that is far too simplistic. “Basing immigration
policy on something as unpredictable as entrepreneurship is one of the
things that sounds good,”
Mr. Miano said, “but it just doesn’t make sense.”
For
graduates working under OPT, the uncertainty is frightening. “You’re
gambling your whole career based on some lottery,” said Venkatesh, 27,
who did not want his last
name published for fear of its affecting job prospects. Having
graduated from New York University in 2014 with a master’s in computer
science, he now works as a programmer for a large financial institution.
Venkatesh,
who is from Hyderabad, India, says that 12 months is not enough time to
pay back university loans or to gain sufficient work experience.
“I
would probably prefer to find a way to do something better in India,”
he said, “because you can’t rely on a broken immigration system.”
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment