Seasonal Immigrant Workers Are in High Demand in United State

 

Foreign workers have long provided critical support to American businesses in the busy seasons—filling temporary, seasonal jobs when domestic workers were not available. This support—almost always of manual labor—is possible due to the H-2 visa program, which Congress created in 1952 with the aim of “alleviating labor shortages … particularly in periods of intense production.”

Specifically, the H-2A visa allows employers to hire temporary agricultural workers, and the H-2B visa lets employers hire non-agricultural workers, like landscapers and hotel staff. Both are popular with businesses. However, it’s becoming clear that the H-2B program is not doing enough to meet the soaring needs of American employers, who are confronting rising worker shortages in the face of changing U.S. labor dynamics.

A new analysis by the American Immigration Council reveals that the number of temporary non-agricultural workers certified by the U.S. Department of Labor grew from over 147,000 in fiscal year (FY) 2018 to more than 215,000 in FY 2023—a 46% jump in just five years. Still, the visa program caps the number of workers at 66,000 workers per year, split between the first and second halves of the fiscal year. Congress had to authorize additional visas in the past four fiscal years.

More information https://inmigracionyvisas.com/a6159-Seasonal-Immigrant-Workers-Are-in-High-Demand-in-United-State.html

State Department denies substantial percentage of employer-sponsored immigrant visas

 

By: Leslie Dellon - www.immigrationimpact.com/

Surprising data recently revealed thatconsular officers denied applicants for employer-sponsored immigrant visas at afar higher rate than U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officersdenied green cards to employer-sponsored applicants.

Data analyzed by the Cato Instituteshows that since Fiscal Year 2008, USCIS denied about 8% of employer-sponsoredimmigrants while the average denial rate by consular officers was 63%. The CatoInstitute has identified a disturbing difference that disadvantagesemployer-sponsored immigrants that apply abroad—and which, to our knowledge,has not been raised before. Our analysis of the findings and conclusionsfollows.

By “employer-sponsored,” theCato Institute means the employment-based (EB) second preference category foradvanced degree professionals or persons of exceptional ability and the EBthird preference category for skilled workers, professionals, or “otherworkers.”...

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5483-Denies-Percentage-of-Employer-Sponsored-Immigrant-Visas.html

Over 250,000 Young People Are at Risk of Deportation When They Turn 21

 

By: Katy Murdza www.immigrationimpact.com/

A lesser-known group of young people who grew up in the United States with immigration status—typically the children of noncitizens who entered the U.S. on temporary work visas—is increasingly at risk of deportation.

They are known as Documented Dreamers, and when these young adults turn 21, they “age out” of their previous lawful status, which was tied to their parents’ visas. They are then required to seek and obtain immigration status on their own or to depart the country. If they fail to depart, they run the risk of being subjected to immigration enforcement and potential deportation.

If a parent can adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status, also known as a green card, before their children turn 21, the children are eligible to obtain permanent residency through the same process. But many temporary workers are not eligible to adjust their status. And others are trapped in years-long green card backlogs, like many immigrant workers from India and China, more information  https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5314-young-people-are-at-risk-of-deportation.html

Class Action Settlement Gives Second Chance to Qualifying US Employers for H-1B Petition Approval

 

By: Leslie Dellon www.immigrationimpact.com/

A recent class action settlement is expected to result in U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approving more market research analyst H-1B petitions.

The lawsuit was filed by four U.S. employers whose H-1B petitions had been denied when USCIS determined that market research analysts were not a “specialty occupation” as required for an H-1B visa classification. Jobs in the H-1B category require a worker to possess highly specialized knowledge acquired through a bachelor’s or higher degree in a “specific specialty” or equivalent at the entry level. USCIS based its determination on a flawed interpretation of the market research analyst entry in the Occupational Outlook Handbook, a Department of Labor publication that includes information about how to enter an occupation.

The plaintiffs requested relief for themselves and other U.S. employers like them whose petitions USCIS would have approved if the agency had not made this decision about the OOH market research analyst entry.

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5283-Class-Action-Settlement-Gives-Second-Chance-to-Qualifying-US-Employers.html

US Visa Policies Prevent Tech Startups From Hiring Foreign Workers

By Walter Ewing www.immigrationimpact.com

Tech startups are engines of innovation, economic growth, and job creation. Yet U.S. visa policies may be preventing startups from hiring the highly skilled foreign professionals they need to succeed.

A new study looks at foreign and U.S.-born workers who recently graduated from American universities. Researchers specifically wanted to see where foreign workers with a PhD in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) got their first jobs after graduating.

Foreign workers are just as likely to apply for and receive job offers from startups as U.S. citizens, the study found. Yet foreign workers are 56% less likely to work for a tech startup once they’ve completed their degree.

This disparity is significant. Roughly half of all doctorate holders in computer science and engineering are strong>foreign-born—meaning that startups are missing out on a large share of the high-skilled workforce.

Cutting out a significant piece of tech startups’ potential labor force hurts the companies (which may struggle to stay afloat with a reduced pool of candidates). But it also means the United States is losing the innovation and job creation that these U.S.-educated foreign workers could bring.

Foreign workers also face difficulties because they may have to depart the United States if they cannot transition from post-graduate training as a student to H-1B status due to the annual limit exceeding the demand—even if a startup is willing to sponsor them for temporary employment. Even when sponsored for permanent employment, foreign nationals face lengthy waits for many employment-based categories, particularly if they were born in China or India.

Many startups are unable to effectively tap into this reservoir of talent because they do not have the resources to complete the laborious process of sponsoring potential foreign workers so they can apply for green cards.

To sponsor a worker, the report estimates that a startup would need to spend between $5,000 to $10,000 in filing and attorney fees complying with the requirements of federal agencies and wait months, if not years, to complete the various stages of the green card process. This is beyond the reach of many small startups that lack dedicated human resources departments.

This means foreign workers just entering the labor force have a better chance of getting a green card if they work for a larger, established company than for a small startup.

After they receive their green card, however, they have much more freedom of movement. The study finds that foreign-born PhDs who get their green cards while working at a larger company are more likely to move on to a startup than to another large company.

Foreign-born PhDs in this country know that startups are where the action is in the high-tech economy. But, in considering their futures, they also need to take into account which companies are best equipped to invest the time and money that is needed to help them secure green cards. Without green cards, they might be unable to work in the United States at all and be obligated to return to their home countries.

Unfortunately, this system leaves startups at a disadvantage—unable to hire a great many talented professionals just as they are graduating from U.S. universities with their STEM doctorates in hand.

Both startups and the U.S. economy would benefit from a green-card application process that is simpler and less expensive than the current process. For example, what if foreign nationals with a U.S. STEM PhD degree could apply for a green card after graduation without being subject to the annual numerical limitations? Doing so would foster innovation, growth, and job creation.

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4483-US-Visa-Policies-Prevent-Tech-Hiring-Workers.html

USCIS Visa Petition Denials On The Rise

By Tory Johnson

Legal immigration channels to the United States are continuing to suffer under the Trump administration. These restrictions are having an effect on employment-based immigration—particularly petitions for temporary foreign workers.

American businesses file such petitions in order to hire and retain foreign-born workers who make vital contributions to companies, industries, and the U.S. economy. 

Yet U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is denying and scrutinizing some of the most relied-upon petitions at a higher rate than in the past. USCIS data through June 2019 show a clear uptick in denials and requests for evidence (RFEs) for H-1B and L-1 petitions. 

In the first three quarters of the current fiscal year (ending October 1), USCIS denied 16.1% of initial H-1B petitions. That denial rate is nearly four times higher than it was in FY 2015. The denial rate has experienced a steady increase each year since FY 2015. USCIS denied 28% of initial L-1 petitions in the first three quarters of FY 2019. That denial rate is significantlyhigher than what it was in the past four fiscal years. 

USCIS also is issuing more RFEs, essentially asking for additional documents to confirm the validity of the application. While seeking additional evidence may seem minor, in practice RFEs may add months to an already arduous process that can hinder an employer’s ability to plan and meet business needs. 

The RFE rate for H-1B petitions has increased by 78% in the last five years, reaching almost 40% in the first three quarters of FY 2019 compared to 22 and 21% in FYs 2015 and 2016, respectively. And even when petitioners respond with additional information, increasingly USCIS maintains the denial. In FY 2019 (as of June), only 63% of H-1B petitions were approved after an RFE was issued, compared to 83% in FY 2015. 

The RFE rate for L-1 petitions is even higher, nearing 54% in the first three quarters of FY 2019. By comparison, the L-1 RFE rate was just 34% in FY 2015. Again, even after responding to the RFE, many petitions are still denied—the approval has been about 50% since FY 2017. 

USCIS denials for these groups have been increasing under the Trump administration, most noticeably after the president’s Buy American, Hire American executive order. Critics further point to changes USCIS made—without congressional involvement— that affect how the agency evaluates and adjudicates these petitions. USCIS released some information in 2018 regarding reasons for issuing denials and RFEs. The most common reason USCIS issued an RFE in 2018 for H-1B petitions was because the position did not satisfy the “specialty occupation” definition or criteria. 

The administration issued new guidance in 2018 that significantly affected the understanding of “specialty occupations.” The changes were prominent and controversial, in part due to predictions that it would further restrict U.S. businesses’ ability to hire and retain talented workers born outside the country. Many businesses are fighting these denials and pushing back on the policies enabling USCIS to adjudicate petitions with a narrow interpretation of the rules. 

While some petitions are still moving through USCIS, it is clear that rising denial rates has become a persistent trend. For many American businesses, this trend is one that fosters uncertainty and presents additional challenges to achieving their goals and contributing to the modern economy. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4405-USCIS-Visa-Petition-Denials-On-The-Rise.html

USCIS Hits H-1B Cap Within Days, Showing America Needs Foreign Workers

Written by Walter Ewing

As another H-1B season comes to an end, one thing is clear: the demand for educated foreign workers is as high as ever. The annual H-1B cap was reached within a mere 5 business days. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began accepting petitions for Fiscal Year 2020 on April 1. On April 12, the agency announced it’s received more petitions than the entire yearly cap allows.

There is a limit of 65,000 regular visas available each fiscal year for new hires. Another 20,000 visas are for foreign professionals who graduate with a master’s degree or Ph.D. from a U.S. university. In recent years, demand for H-1B visa numbers has far outpaced the supply. In fact, this is the seventh consecutive year that the regular H-1B visa cap was hit within a week.


USCIS issues H-1B policy changes

Beyond the inadequate number of visas, employers faced last-minute USCIS policy changes three years in a row. These policy announcements affected H-1B petitions submitted close to the first day of the filing season. 

USCIS announced a change in how petitions are processed only two short weeks before the start of this year’s filing deadline. Employers said it threw the whole program “into chaos.” 

The agency made another change in January 2019. USCIS reversed the order petitions are selected in. In the past, USCIS selected petitions for the 20,000 “master’s exemption” first. Now, the agency will first conduct a lottery using all H-1B petitions. After that lottery is complete, it will run a second lottery with all remaining “master’s exempt” petitions. 


How this may affect H-1B petition selection

This change will likely result in USCIS selecting more petitions for workers with U.S. master’s degrees or Ph.Ds. But that change doesn’t necessarily represent the best choice for every available position. 

Under the new system, some workers may slip through the cracks. 

For instance, a foreign national with a master’s degree from a U.S. university might have a better chance of getting an H-1B visa number than a scientist with a Ph.D. from a foreign university. 


H-1B workers will still be in high demand

Though these new policies may alter the H-1B selection process, the workers will continue to be in high demand. The inadequacy of the H-1B cap is one sign. But the fact that unemployment rates are low in occupations that use large numbers of workers with H-1B visas is another sign. 

For example, jobs in the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) field have low unemployment rates compared to the national average. H-1B workers are most commonly employed in STEM jobs. These low unemployment rates signal a demand for labor that exceeds supply. This means H-1B workers are not displacing native-born workers. 

H-1B workers also tend to earn higher wages than comparable U.S.-born workers, even after accounting for differences in age and occupation. This holds true across fields like information technology, engineering, healthcare, and post-secondary education. Employers aren’t saving money by hiring H-1B workers. This suggests these workers have skills which are in high demand. 

The arbitrary numerical cap on the number of new H-1B visas does not serve the interests of U.S. workers or the U.S. economy. Rather, the cap starves the labor force of talented foreign professionals who fuel economic growth and innovation. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4109-America-Needs-Foreign-Workers.html

Taking H-4 Spouses Out Of The US Workforce Would Hurt Women The Most

Written by Walter Ewing

The Trump administration is set to issue a proposed rule that would prevent the spouses of certain high-skilled temporary foreign workers from getting jobs while they are in the United States. The rule—which would bar employment for those in H-4 status—would waste economic potential and have a disproportionate impact on women. 

This new rule derives from President Trump’s “Buy American and Hire American” executive order, which incorrectly assumes that fewer jobs for foreigners automatically translates into more jobs for natives. But barring an entire group of skilled workers from the labor force would at most have no impact on employment opportunities for native-born Americans. At worst, it may actually decrease the number of jobs available to natives. 

The foreign nationals with H-4 status who could lose their work authorization are the spouses of high-skilled foreign temporary workers in H-1B status. Roughly 90 percent are women. Since 2015, these H-4s have been allowed to apply for work authorization in the United States if their H-1B spouses meet certain requirements on the path to permanent residence. 

While the Trump administration believes that native-born workers can simply move into the jobs vacated by H-4s, the economics of job creation does not work that way. According to an analysis by the Cato Institute, pulling the spouses of H-1B workers out of the labor force would result in significant economic losses—including the possible loss of jobs among the native-born. 

As Cato notes, the spouses of H-1B workers tend to be highly educated and, when given a chance, economically productive: 

• Nearly 60 percent have a graduate degree.
• About three-quarters (around 91,000 people, primarily women) are employed.
• Two-thirds of employed H-4s work in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and math), much like their H-1B spouses
• About 7 percent are self-employed; meaning that some also employ other workers.

Given their high earnings, this group adds around $5.5 billion to the U.S. economy. This contribution would stop if the labor force loses them. It would reduce federal tax revenue by $1.9 billion and state and local tax revenue by $530 million. 

The impact on employment is harder to quantify. While pulling all H-4s out of the labor force might open up a few thousand jobs for the native-born, this would be cancelled out by the loss of jobs when self-employed H-4s are forced to close their businesses and let go of their native-born employees. 

On top of that, the presence of foreign workers in the labor force—H-4s included—boosts both job opportunities and earnings for the native-born. 

Foreign and native workers have skill sets which complement each other. Employing foreign workers enhances natives’ productivity and, in turn, their wages. Foreign workers also create jobs by spending their earnings in the U.S. economy and paying U.S. taxes. Eliminating them from the labor force would cause both jobs and earnings to drop, hurting native workers. 

Contrary to the claims of the Trump administration, there is no economic gain from keeping H-4 spouses unemployed. They add to the U.S. economy, create jobs and businesses, generate tax revenue, and raise wages for native-born Americans. There’s no down side to this arrangement in economic terms. 

It’s clear the administration’s proposed rule will do more harm than good. It also amounts to a needlessly punitive action against high-skilled foreign spouses—particularly women—who are already putting their talents to use in the U.S. economy. 

Fuente: https://immigrationimpact.com/

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4072-United-State-forbid-work-to-spouse-h4.html

Written by Aaron Reichlin-Melnick

Citing high rates of visa overstays, on January 18 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a new rule mostly barring nationals from the Dominican Republic, the Philippines, and Ethiopia from receiving certain temporary worker visas. The U.S. territory of Guam is likely to be most impacted as it relies on large numbers of Filipino workers. 

The new restrictions apply to two types of visas: H-2A visas for temporary or seasonal agricultural workers, and H-2B visas for temporary or seasonal non-agricultural workers. An employer petitioning for a worker to come on an H-2A or H-2B visa must show that the planned work is truly temporary or seasonal and there are not enough U.S. workers available to do the work. 

Only foreign nationals from countries that DHS has designated as “participating countries” are eligible for these visas. Ever year DHS and the Department of State evaluate the list of participating countries to determine whether they still meet the criteria for inclusion. 

DHS may remove a country it has previously designated as “participating” if nationals from that country tend to overstay the period of time they are authorized to be in the country. DHS also may remove a country from the participating list if the country does not cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in accepting deportations. 

Citing its own data, DHS estimated that Filipino workers on H-2B visas overstayed their authorized stay nearly 40 percent of the time. In addition, because there were serious concerns about trafficking of Filipino workers, DHS banned workers from that country from H-2A visas as well. 

DHS similarly revoked eligibility for nationals from the Dominican Republic for H-2B visas based on a 30 percent overstay rate. However, these nationals were not barred from receiving H-2A visas, based on a much lower overstay rate of ten percent. 

Ethiopia, by comparison, was removed from the list of participating countries as a result of its refusal to accept all deportees. In 2016, ICE designated Ethiopia “at risk of non-compliance” with ICE’s deportation demands. While DHS acknowledged that Ethiopia had made strides towards accepting more deportations since 2016, it chose to make Ethiopian nationals ineligible for H-2A and H-2B visas since it is no longer considered “at risk of non-compliance” with ICE. 

Importantly, nationals from these countries are not entirely barred from entering on H-2 visas. The petitioning employer would have to convince U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that the foreign worker’s entry would be in the national interest. In addition, certain military construction projects on Guam are exempt from the restrictions under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019. 

The visa restrictions on Filipinos appear most likely to affect Guam. Business organizations in the territory expressed surprise at the announcement and a concern about how the island would be affected. Filipino workers on H-2B visas make up the majority of foreign workers who are brought in for construction projects in Guam. Some on the island are worried that this new announcement could lead to delays in construction projects and a possibility of lost investment. 

Under the new announcement, current H-2A and H-2B workers from those countries are unaffected but cannot apply to extend their stay or change their visa status. However, the new restrictions go into effect immediately for 2019, which will likely affect the record number of H-2A and H-2B petitions filed in early January.

 

 

Fuente: www.immigrationimpact.com  

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4002-Blocks-H2B-Visas-For-Filipinos-Dominicans-And-Ethiopians.html

With Comment Period Expired, Uncertainty Remains About H-1B Registration Process

Written by Walter Ewing

January 2 marked the final day for comments on a proposed rule by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that would implement a new registration requirement for H-1B visas for well-educated foreign professionals. This proposal would require employers looking to hire H-1B workers to first register electronically with the agency during a specified registration period.

Hasty implementation of the proposal in 2019 could disrupt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 H-1B petition process and impose significant costs on employers. The proposed rule would also change how H-1B visa petitions are counted, likely restricting the ability of businesses to get the most qualified workers. 

The most obvious problem with the proposed registration system is that it is not yet functional, yet USCIS is counting on it being in place by April 1—which seems unlikely. Even if the system is up and running in time and performs as expected, it would still wreak havoc on the H-1B petition process. 

Companies have already devoted resources to petitioning for H-1B workers under the current system. Having to then switch to a new system at the last minute would be costly, not to mention disruptive to businesses trying to hire the workers they need in a timely fashion. This would be particularly harmful to smaller businesses, which have fewer resources to switch gears in the middle of the petition process. But even big businesses could suffer from a crushing workload in a short span of time if they suddenly have to file multiple petitions under a new system only weeks before the FY 2020 H-1B season begins. 

As for the proposed change in the way petitions for H-1Bs are counted, the harm to employers is less obvious yet costly all the same. Currently, there are two pools of H-1B workers—one in which USCIS selects 20,000 petitions filed for graduates of certain U.S. master’s degree programs (or higher) that are exempt from the annual cap of 65,000; and another pool of applicants who fall under the cap. 

Since demand usually exceeds supply for H-1B visa numbers, USCIS set up a lottery for each of these two pools. The 20,000 U.S. master’s degree petitions are the first selected by lottery. Then, all remaining petitions are eligible for another lottery. 

Under the new proposed rules, however, USCIS would reverse the process. It would first conduct the lottery using all H-1B petitions. Then, after that lottery is complete, USCIS would run a second lottery restricted to all remaining “master’s exempt” petitions. The net result of this change would be an increase in the number of petitions selected for workers with U.S. master’s or higher degrees. Consequently, a foreign national who recently graduated with a master’s degree from a U.S. university might have a significantly better chance of getting an H-1B visa number than a much better-qualified worker who has years of professional experience and a Ph.D. from a foreign university. 

Employer and industry groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have urged USCIS to delay implementation of the new registration system until after the FY 2020 petition season, giving businesses more time to adjust before the next round of H-1B “cap subject” petitions. They are also urging USCIS to reconsider changing the order of the H-1B lotteries so that employers have maximum flexibility to hire those workers best suited to particular jobs. 

As it now stands, a great deal of uncertainty surrounds the H-1B petition process this year. Reflecting the anxiety this has created among employers, more than 750 comments to the proposed rule have been filed. USCIS should take this feedback seriously—and think twice about hurriedly implementing an unfinished system that changes the way H-1B petitions are filed.

 

Source: http://immigrationimpact.com/ 

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3985-Uncertainty-Remains-About-H1B-Registration-Process.html

USCIS Proposed H1-B Registration Rule Creates More Uncertainty for Employers

 

Written by Leslie Dellon

Just months short of the normal starting date for the annual H-1B petition process, USCIS has proposed major changes. U.S. employers who rely on this visa category, which is for jobs that require a bachelor’s or higher degree in a “specific specialty” or equivalent at the entry-level, are now in limbo, unsure whether these changes will be implemented before the normal petition-submission date. 

Just last week, USCIS issued a proposal to change the current system for H-1B “cap-subject” petitions. The proposal has two components: requiring employers to register online in advance to be eligible to submit an H-1B petition and reversing the order in which petitions are selected. 

Currently, USCIS selects petitions for the 20,000 “master’s exemption” first (for workers with a master’s or higher degree from U.S. colleges or universities that meet certain requirements). Any of these not selected are included when USCIS selects petitions for the 65,000 “cap.” (Selection is only the first step: USCIS has to accept a selected petition for filing, and then decide whether to approve.) 

USCIS has provided a 30-day comment period, ending January 2, 2019. It appears that USCIS wants to proceed with the change in the selection process for April 2019, even if—as is likely—the registration system is not ready. 

As proposed, USCIS would provide at least 30 days’ advance notice, through its website, of the registration start date. The registration period would run for at least 14 days, beginning at least 14 days before the first business day in April on which H-1B petitions could be filed. 

When registering, the employer would have to identify the foreign national it intends to hire. As a result, the employer would have less time to consider hiring foreign nationals who need an H-1B classification. 

When the initial registration period ends, if USCIS has more registrations than required for visa number allocation, the agency will hold a “lottery,” but keep the unselected registrations “on reserve” for that fiscal year. If there are less registrations than needed, then USCIS will open another registration period. 

For any registrations selected, USCIS will notify employers and provide at least 60 days within which to file. USCIS anticipates that it will stagger the filings to help the agency manage its workflow. 

The proposal increases uncertainty because employers will need to proceed as if they will be required to register but also will need to prepare their H-1B petitions since registration is unlikely—and they will not know if their petitions are less likely to be selected than before if the petition does not fall within the “master’s exemption.” 

The registration process also injects even greater uncertainty than currently exists as to when USCIS may make a decision on a petition—because USCIS will control how long the registration period lasts and the time period during which a selected registrant may file an H-1B petition. 

USCIS describes the proposal as a “merit-based” rule in support of President Trump’s Buy American and Hire American Executive Order to “suggest reforms to help ensure that H-1B visas are awarded to the most-skilled or highest-paid petition beneficiaries.” Since current law does not have a “most-skilled” or “highest-paid” hierarchy for H-1B eligibility, it is questionable whether USCIS could accomplish this through regulation. But even apart from its legality, it remains to be seen whether the proposal would favor those with master’s degrees from U.S. schools that meet the “master’s exemption” requirements. 

USCIS assumes that “master’s exemption” petitions would be for jobs requiring more skills and at a higher salary. But the “master’s exemption” is determined by the degree the beneficiary holds. 

The job offered to the beneficiary may or may not require a master’s degree. Also, the salary an employer offers depends on several factors, such as the type of job, the geographic location, and whether prior work experience is required. 

With these variables, there are many situations in which a job requiring a bachelor’s degree and work experience would be the “most-skilled” and “highest paid.” 

Also, what makes a U.S. master’s degree from a low-ranking U.S. university more meritorious than, say, a Ph.D. from Oxford. 

It also is possible that the proposed new selection order will harm a particular industry, or a particular region, which could reduce the income and opportunities for U.S. workers. 

The agency acknowledges that it “has not been able to determine how this may impact particular industries currently submitting H-1B cap petitions for individuals without master’s degrees … and how this may impact particular types of workers” and “welcomes input.” Comments should be submitted to furnish the critical data that USCIS lacks.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3962-Proposed-H1B-Registration-Rule-Creates-More-Uncertainty-for-Employers.html

Immigrants Create Jobs for American Workers, Boosting the U.S. Employment Rate

Written by Walter Ewing 

When immigrants bring their skills to the U.S. labor market, everyone—immigrants and native-born workers alike—benefit from their company. Research has repeatedly shown that native-born workers are advantaged by the presence of immigrant workers in the labor market. 

A new report from the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) adds to this growing body of research. Specifically, the report finds that immigrants have no negative effect on the unemployment rate or labor force participation rate of native-born Americans. 

The presence of more immigrants in the labor force is associated with a small but undeniable increase in the labor force participation rate of natives, NFAP concludes. Likewise, more immigrant workers correspond with a small decline in the unemployment rate of the native-born. 

Even less-educated native-born workers are not harmed by immigration, while the labor force participation rate of more-educated native-born workers increases as immigration rises. 

These outcomes are sometimes lost in the midst of structural changes in the U.S. economy which are brought about by many factors—of which immigration is but one. 

For instance, unemployment skyrocketed during the Great Recession of 2007-2009 and bounced back slowly. Meanwhile, labor force participation has been declining for years—a trend that accelerated with the recession and has yet to reverse. 

These trends are often analyzed in a vacuum, as if immigration was the only relevant variable affecting complex economic phenomena. But the U.S. economy isn’t that simple. 

In addition to quantifying the beneficial impact of immigration on natives, NFAP presents additional reasons why the outcomes of immigration are positive for most American workers. 

Immigrants generally do not compete directly with U.S. natives for jobs to begin with, because they work in different sectors of the economy and live in different parts of the country. Even if they do find themselves in the same place and the same industry, they are likely to perform different kinds of tasks. For instance, natives—for whom English is the native language—get more of the “communications-intensive” jobs, while immigrants who are not native speakers of English are more likely to work in jobs that require physical strength or exertion. 

It is important to keep in mind that the impact of immigrants on the U.S. economy in general and native-born workers in particular goes far beyond employment and wages. Immigrant-led households across the United States contribute hundreds of billions of dollars in federal, state, and local taxes each year. Residents of immigrant-led households wield nearly a trillion dollars in collective spending power (after-tax income). And millions of immigrant business owners account for one-in-five of all self-employed U.S. residents and generate tens of billions of dollars in business income each year. 

Taken as a group, immigrants don’t consume jobs; they generate them.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com
http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3807-Immigrants-Create-Jobs-for-American-Workers.html