employers whine, moan, and gripe

Date: Thursday, May 24, 2007 1:21 AM

<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER No. 1697 -- 5/24/2007 >>>>>

The Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill in the Senate (S. 1348) is such a
sweetheart deal for the cheap labor lobby you would think that they would
be pushing for its immediate passage -- but that's not the case. They don't
think the bill is a big enough giveaway!

On skilled visas employers have four major gripes about the CIR bill:

o Gripe #1 -- Merit Based Green Card System

One thing we hear all the time is that employers use immigration to import
the "best and the brightest" into the U.S., but we all know that it's all
about cheap labor. The Merit system will base visa approval on whether the
immigrants are the ones with the most merit, which is exactly the opposite
of what employers really want. They want to be able to continue hiring
whomever they want, when they want, and for whatever reason they want.
Super shill Stuart Anderson griped that, "As the bill stands now, I think
it's pretty much a disaster for high-tech employers." Anderson's statement
was so encouraging that you might be tempted to support the CIR, but resist
the temptation because the bill is truly a disaster.

It's worth noting that the Indian lobby group called Immigration Voice is
complaining about merit based green cards also. That's because most of the
leaders of that group are already in the green card system and don't want
to upset the apple cart. It's very interesting that their leaders are
willing to sell out their paying H-1B members just to insure their own
visa. Shame! Shame!

o Gripe #2 -- Student Visas

The CIR contains F-4 visas from the Skil bill along with its two year work
authorization that allows foreign students to work in the US for up to two
years while they are getting paid for jobs like internships. Employers
gripe that the students aren't exempted from the H-1B cap, and since the
new green card system is based on merit, some of the students will have to
wait in line with everyone else for a visa. Of course they get to wait two
years which is a long enough time considering they are supposed to be the
geniuses that are coming here to save our economy. If they are that bright,
it seems they should be able to get sponsored for a visa within two years.

o Gripe #3 -- Not enough H-1B visas

Keep in mind that the CIR contains massive increases in H-1B visas, and
creates some others like the Y and it the Z Visa. In the case of H-1B, the
yearly cap would go from its current 85,000 a year to 115,000 and would
allow it to go as high as 180,000. You would think that would be enough,
but not according to Jenifer Verdery, director of work-force development at
Intel, who said that, "There aren't enough new visas -- period." Apparently
she shares Bill Gates' belief that there shouldn't be any limits.

o Gripe #4 -- Durbin/Grassley Reforms

As I have explained before, for the most part the Durbin/Grassley reform
bill is mostly for show because it won't do enough to help US workers. The
most worthwhile aspect of the bill was the prevailing salary provision but
those were stripped out of the CIR bill.

So what's their gripe? Answer: Even a gutted version of Durbin/Grassley is
enough to set off employers who don't feel they should have any
restrictions on hiring foreign labor.

One Durbin/Grassley reform that has the shills in a tizzy is the
requirement that no more than 50 percent of the U.S.-based employees at a
company using H-1B workers can be H-1B visa holders. This particular DG
reform is very weak but the cheap labor lobby isn't about to compromise on
even the slightest inconvenience. Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney and
president-elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said that
this provision will hurt Indian owned bodyshops. Kuck is right about that,
since the bodyshops hire almost exclusively foreign nationals and there are
many small high-tech companies that are 100% H-1B. That requirement could
put a small crimp in discriminatory hiring practices against Americans, but
keep in mind that the 50% counts for all employees, not just the high tech
workers. They could dodge this requirement by hiring 51% of their workers
on L-1 visas since those don't count toward the H-1B percentage. If all
else fails the bodyshops could find a way of dealing with this -- like for
instance they could hire more Mexican landscapers that are getting amnesty
with Z Visas.

----- CONCLUSION -----
If I was a gambling man I would bet good odds that the corporate lobbyists
will get amendments to change the bill to their liking. Hopefully the
vultures spend so much time fighting over the rotten meat in the bill that
negotiations on the bill stall, and the Senate lives up to its reputation
as a "do nothing" Congress.

Materials Included

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199701487&pgno=1&queryText=
Why Tech Employers Hate Congress' New Immigration Reform Bill

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/05/23/Senate-H1B-provisions-not-pleasing_2.html
Senate bill's H-1B provisions aren't pleasing

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB117980198096110417-lMyQjAxMDE3NzI5MjgyMDIxWj.html
Business Divided As Debate Opens On Immigration Bill Pleases Employers Of
Unskilled Laborers,
But High-Tech Objects

http://migramatters.blogspot.com/2007/05/look-at-proposed-merit-based-system-in.html
A look at proposed Merit-Based system in Immigration Reform Compromise

http://www.prlog.org/10017827-legals-first-immigration-voice.html
Legals First - Immigration Voice

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199701487&pgno=1&queryText=

Why Tech Employers Hate Congress' New Immigration Reform Bill

Major corporations say the legislation's restrictive provisions and fine
print will handcuff their ability to hire the talent they need to compete
globally.

By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee, InformationWeek
May 23, 2007
URL:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199701487

As momma says, be careful what you wish for. For several years, tech
employers -- including giants like Microsoft and Oracle -- have been
lobbying Congress to raise the cap on H-1B visas, the most common visa used
to hire foreign technology workers for jobs in the U.S.

So, you'd think that a compromise immigration reform bill hammered out
between a bi-partisan group of Senators and the White House that includes
provisions for raising the cap would be a wish-come-true for tech
employers.

Think again. "This bill could be well be worse than the status quo we have
now, and that says a lot," says Jack Krumholtz, Microsoft managing director
of federal government affairs. That's because while the comprehensive and
controversial immigration reform bill proposes to raise the H-1B visa cap
from the current annual 65,000 to 115,000 (and up to a max of 180,000), the
legislation is missing key elements that have been proposed in other bills,
while having restrictive provisions and fine print that tech employers say
will handcuff their ability to hire the talent they need and to compete
globally.

If (and that's a big if) the immigration bill ends gets signed into law
with the H-1B provisions that are drafted into it now, "it will make the
program unworkable moving forward," says Krumholz.

As the bill is debated this week in Congress, as well as in American HR
departments and lunchrooms -- that sentiment is echoed by Robert Hoffman,
VP of government affairs at Oracle and co-chair of Compete America, a
coalition of technology companies that has been pushing for visa and green
card reform for years.

What is bugging tech employers about the bill? For starters, last year the
Senate passed a bill that would've raised the H-1B cap to 115,000 -- but
also exempted from any cap foreign students who earn advanced degrees from
U.S. universities.

Under current laws, 20,000 of these students can be afforded H-1B visas
each year, in addition to the general pool of 65,000 H-1Bs. The proposals
approved last year by the Senate -- but lacking in the current immigration
reform bill -- would've done away with any cap for those students, plus
added another allotment of 20,000 visas for foreign students who have
advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, and math (or STEM)
from foreign schools.

Microsoft, Oracle, and others say they've had to turn away fresh talent --
like those graduating from U.S. school right now -- because the H-1B visa
cap for fiscal 2008 (which starts Oct. 1) was filled for the 65,000 visas
on the first day (in April) that the U.S. accepted the visa petitions, and
the cap on the 20,000 advanced degree visas was hit about a month later.

In fact, on April 2 and April 3, employers filed to U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services nearly 120,000 petitions for the 65,000 fiscal 2008
H-1B visa allotment -- which also would be more than enough to fill the
115,000 H-1B slots proposed in the latest version of comprehensive
immigration reform.

Also, tech employers aren't pleased about one of the most dramatic shifts
proposed by the reform bill. That is a move towards a merit-point system,
where individuals can independently apply for green cards or permanent U.S.
residency that would be awarded according to the total points they'd earn
based on skill set, education, and occupation, and, to a lesser extent,
family ties and other considerations.

Last week, when word spread of a compromise between the White House and the
group of Senators, the bill appeared to shift U.S. immigration tradition,
in which family ties mattered significantly, to a heightened employer-based
system focused on the new point system. However, tech employers say the
point system takes control away from businesses because employers would no
longer sponsor green-card applications for specific individuals they want
to hire.

"The point system is built on top of a scarcity of green cards, and then
shifts personnel decisions into the hands of bureaucrats and away from
employers," says Hoffman.

Although individuals who have advanced degrees in areas like STEM -- or
have skills in demanded occupational fields like STEM -- could potentially
earn more points than green-card applicants with fewer demanded skills and
less education, tech employers say the point system would create a
free-for-all, with "low skills and high skills" competing for the same
backlog of green cards. "This would leave our ability up to chance" as an
employer in planning hiring, says Krumholtz. What else irks tech employers?
Lots. Under current laws, only companies that have more than 15% of their
workforce on H-1B visas -- so called "H-1B dependent" firms -- are held
under certain rules and restrictions. But under the new proposals, some
restrictions are expanded and cover all H-1B employers, regardless of how
dependent they are on H-1B workers for their U.S. workforce. So, companies
like Microsoft -- whose H-1B workforce is a tiny percentage of its total
U.S. staff -- would be held to the same scrutiny as Indian firms, like
Wipro or Infosys, whose U.S. workforces currently are made up mostly by
H-1B visa-holders.

"The proposals would apply restrictions to any employer that wants to hire
H-1B workers," says Krumholtz. "If there's abuse or fraud, let's go over
that, let's target those actions to employers abusing the system or
engaging in fraud," he says. "Why apply those restrictions to legitimate
employers?" he says.

The new proposals require all H-1B employers to attest that no U.S. worker
was displaced from a job six months prior or after an H-1B worker was
hired. That rule creates big hurdles for "legitimate" employers in terms of
flexibility of its workforce and global competitiveness, says Krumholtz.
Oracle's Hoffman says he thinks the provisions "are a huge requirement that
might violate international trade laws." It hinders companies from
responding to changes in the economy-- for instance if an H-1B worker in a
specific job was hired a few months before an economic downturn, would that
inhibit a company from downsizing or layoffs of its American workforce,
asks Hoffman.

"That's a heavy burden on the H-1B program," he says. "That change and
other enforcement could make H-1B [hires] too costly," driving U.S. firms
to do exactly what Americans don't want to happen -- move work offshore
because it's less costly, says Hoffman.

Other restrictions proposed include the requirement that an H-1B visa
applicant's educational degree match up with the job. So, for instance, an
individual applying for a U.S.-based job as a software engineer would need
a software engineering degree. "What if that person has a PhD in
mathematics?" asks Krumholtz, indicating that would be prohibited.

As for the proposed point system, a few other countries, including Canada,
Australia, and most recently the U.K. have adopted point systems. However,
in the case of Australia, for instance, there is a dual-track system that
includes employer-sponsored immigration. That dual-track is missing from
the U.S. proposals, and that could ultimately drive talented applications
to seek employment in other countries in which it's easier to obtain work
visas or permanent status. "The biggest winners in this are Australia,
Canada, France" and other countries that are making immigration easier, not
harder for the highly skilled, highly educated, he says.

Multinational companies like Oracle will be less affected, since an
applicant that can't make it to the U.S. could take a job with Oracle's
other global operations, Hoffman says. However, those new restrictions will
make it harder for promising American startups to hire foreign tech talent
in the U.S., he says.

While tech employers aren't happy with the bill because of the restrictions
it places on H-1B hiring and the proposed green card point system,
opponents to the H-1B program aren't thrilled about the bill either.

"As 'comprehensive immigration reform,' it is a total joke," said John
Miano, founder of U.S. tech professional advocacy group Programmers Guild
in an e-mail interview with InformationWeek.

"The bill doesn't please anyone. Does not solve the problem it is
addressing," he says.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/05/23/Senate-H1B-provisions-not-pleasing_2.html

Senate bill's H-1B provisions aren't pleasing
Both sides of the H-1B debate have complaints about the proposed
legislation working its way through the Senate

By Patrick Thibodeau, Computerworld, IDG News Service

May 23, 2007

The immigration reform deal announced in the U.S. Senate last week is a
work in progress with an uncertain future in both houses of Congress. And
its H-1B provisions aren't making either proponents or critics of the visa
program happy.

If the bill resulting from the bipartisan agreement survives the
legislative gantlet, it will effectively increase the annual H-1B cap to
135,000 visas beginning in the next federal fiscal year, which starts in
October. That is based on a proposed increase in the cap for regular H-1B
visas from 65,000 to 115,000, plus the continuation of 20,000 visas that go
to applicants who have received advanced degrees from U.S. universities,
according to some groups that have analyzed the proposed legislation.

The measure also would provide some relief for companies that applied for
H-1B visas for the next fiscal year but lose a selection lottery held by
the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The USCIS received about
150,000 applications for the 65,000 regular visas on April 2, the first and
only day that it accepted applications.

A computer program will randomly generate a list of visa winners. But the
Senate bill, if it reaches President Bush's desk as written, would apply to
the 2008 fiscal year, enabling the USCIS to issue an additional 50,000
visas to applicants from this year's lottery pool.

In addition, the proposal in the Senate would allow the new cap of 115,000
regular visas to quickly rise if it was reached during the first half of a
fiscal year. If that happened, the cap would increase another 15 percent
for that fiscal year and then an additional 15 percent for the subsequent
year, although it couldn't go any higher than 180,000 visas annually.

The legislation also incorporates some of the provisions included in an
H-1B bill drafted earlier this year by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck
Grassley (R-Iowa). For instance, no more than 50 percent of the U.S.-based
employees at a company using H-1B workers can be visa holders.

The proposed rule would apply that restriction to companies with 50 or more
employees.

That limit could have a substantial impact on India-based offshore services
firms, many of which are heavy users of H-1B visas, said Charles Kuck, an
immigration attorney and president-elect of the American Immigration
Lawyers Association.

If the offshore vendors have more than 50 percent of their employees in the
U.S. working under visas, the Senate legislation's proposed limit would
"disable them from using the [visa] program for some period of time," said
Kuck. Companies that also use H-1B visas but employ large numbers of U.S
workers, such as Microsoft, wouldn't be affected.

But proposed changes in how green cards are awarded to foreign workers "is
a much bigger problem" for IT vendors, said Kuck. The Senate bill would
create a point system for issuing green cards based on the skills and
education of the person seeking permanent residency. The current system is
more market-driven because it allows employers to request green cards, more
closely matching individual employees with needed skills.

The Senate's bill "puts the U.S. government in charge of who can be
employed in the United States," Kuck said.

"As the bill stands now, I think it's pretty much a disaster for high-tech
employers," said Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National
Foundation for American Policy, during a conference call this week. The
call was held to announce the release of a report arguing, among other
things, that H-1B workers are helping the economy and aren't hurting U.S.
programmers who enjoy low unemployment and high wages.

But opponents of the H-1B program are dismayed over the proposed cap
increase. John Miano, founder of the Summit, N.J.-based Programmers Guild,
claims that H-1B workers are being used as a source of low-cost labor.

Miano said studies done by his group have shown that the prevailing wage
claims of companies with H-1B workers were about $16,000 less than actual
prevailing wages.

Ron Hira, an assistant professor of public policy at Rochester Institute of
Technology in New York, thinks the H-1B program is discouraging students
from entering high-tech fields and weakening the ability of the U.S. to
innovate and even keep the military properly equipped. "I think the stakes
are really pretty high here," Hira said.

But many changes to the Senate bill are likely; in fact, the measure has
already seen some. Last week, when initial drafts of the Senate bill
surfaced, high-tech groups said that the 20,000-visa exemption for advanced
degree holders had been removed from the legislation. But a later draft
changed that, and the Compete America trade group, which represents
high-tech organizations and other entities that support the H-1B program,
says the exemption remains in the bill.

Even if the bipartisan agreement shepherded by Sen. Edward Kennedy
(D-Mass.) does get out of the Senate, it also must win approval in the
House of Representatives, where it would face additional proposed changes.

For instance, U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.), who in 2005 introduced
a bill called the Defend the American Dream Act that sought to improve
protections for U.S. workers threatened by offshoring, plans to introduce
new legislation this year. "We're close, and we're working out the
details," said Caley Gray, a spokesman for Pascrell.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB117980198096110417-lMyQjAxMDE3NzI5MjgyMDIxWj.html

Business Divided
As Debate Opens
On Immigration
Bill Pleases Employers
Of Unskilled Laborers,
But High-Tech Objects

By MIRIAM JORDAN, PUI-WING TAM and LAUREN ETTER
May 22, 2007; Page A1

As the Senate begins debate on a landmark immigration bill meant to address
the future need for workers in the U.S., a divide over the measure among
the nation's employers could undermine its chances of becoming law.

From the moment the White House and key lawmakers struck a tentative deal
on immigration last week, it was clear that not all employers were on
board. The deal, the most significant potential change in immigration law
since an amnesty program for illegal immigrants in 1986, was designed to
provide for the labor needs of industries ranging from high technology to
agriculture, as well as to resolve the status of the estimated 12 million
people now living in the U.S. illegally. (See related article1.)

DIVISION OF LABOR

The Issue: Industries are split over whether a proposed immigration bill
meets their needs for foreign workers.
What's at Stake: Lack of business support could hurt the chances of the
landmark bill. Some industries fear concessions in Congress will water down
the measure.
The Bottom Line: Unskilled workers -- and companies that hire them -- stand
to benefit the most.Employers like farmers, restaurateurs and construction
contractors who rely heavily on unskilled workers generally support the
deal, but high-tech industries that need skilled workers complain that it
doesn't give them the flexibility to recruit workers with the specific mix
of skills they need.

For employers of the unskilled, the tentative deal offers a welcome path to
legitimacy for their work forces, which typically include a high proportion
of illegal immigrants. Under the deal, illegal residents who can prove they
entered the U.S. before Jan. 1 would get a temporary-resident permit. The
plan would essentially erase their illegal status and let them work while
awaiting a so-called Z visa that would entitle them to live legally in the
U.S. The bill also eventually would allow 400,000 temporary workers to come
to the U.S. on a "Y visa" each year to fill mainly low-skilled jobs.

"Overall, we feel very positive about" the bill, said Tom Nassif, president
of Western Growers, which represents 3,000 farmers who grow more than half
of the country's produce. "There's a program for legalizing our existing
work force."

For agriculture, it is a deal worth protecting. Mr. Nassif voiced concern
that some of his industry's victories could be eroded as the bill moves
through the legislative process.

High-tech companies, however, say the deal doesn't provide enough visas for
software engineers, computer programmers and other workers whose skills are
in short supply in the U.S. In addition, they say a new merit system
envisioned in the deal, which is designed to ease the way to legal entry
for educated immigrants, wouldn't necessarily ensure the specific skills
high-tech employers need.

"As the bill stands, the bill is a disaster for high-tech employers," said
Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American
Policy, a nonpartisan research organization, and a former staff director of
the Senate Immigration Subcommittee.

What follows is an industry-by-industry snapshot of employer reaction to
the deal:

Food Processors: The meat-packing industry has grown increasingly reliant
on immigrant labor, and in recent months has been the target of raids by
the Department of Homeland Security that rounded up hundreds of
undocumented workers. As a result, the industry is largely relieved by the
deal, which could make much of its work force legal.

"We are pleased that the White House and key members of the Senate have
found common ground on the issue of comprehensive immigration reform," said
Sean McHugh, vice president of investor relations, public relations and
communications at Swift & Co., the nation's third-largest processor of both
fresh beef and pork.

The company, which has annual sales of more than $9 billion, employs about
15,000 people in the U.S., and has seen hundreds of its workers arrested in
raids. "We hope these reform provisions remain intact through the balance
of the legislative process and ultimately become law," said Mr. McHugh.

At Tyson Foods Inc., one of the nation's largest poultry processors,
immigrants account for as much as 60% of the workers at some plants. Archie
Schaffer, a company spokesman, said Tyson supports the basic concept of the
draft bill. However, he expressed concern that a requirement for workers to
return home in order to apply for permanent legal residency -- known as a
"touch back" provision -- could be disruptive.

"We don't want to lose any continuity," said Mr. Schaffer, noting that the
company invests as much as one year and thousands of dollars in training
for each employee to become proficient at his or her job.

Restaurants: The National Restaurant Association, the industry's main
lobbying group, lauded the measure for allowing undocumented immigrants
already in the country to stay. "I think that finally we're going to get
something done," said Craig Miller, who was the association's chairman
until last year and remains a board member.

Mr. Miller, who is also chief executive of Ruth's Chris Steak House Inc., a
national chain of 106 restaurants, praised the bill for decriminalizing
immigrant workers "because they're here and working hard."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://migramatters.blogspot.com/2007/05/look-at-proposed-merit-based-system-in.html

Saturday, May 19, 2007
A look at proposed Merit-Based system in Immigration Reform Compromise
posted by Duke1676
One of the most controversial aspects of the proposed immigration reform
compromised announced Thursday is the switch from an immigration system
based upon family ties and family reunification to one based on a "merit
system" that gives greater weight to educational level, jobs skills, and
English proficiency.

Advocates of the compromise claim that the "merit system" will insure that
those who qualify for Permanent Residence Status (green card) under the new
system would be those who can make the greatest contributions to society.

Those opposed the plan claim it's a high-risk, large-scale social
experimentation that would have adverse effects on families and disregards
a fundamental, longstanding principle of American immigration policy and of
real family values. Additionally they claim it would establish a class of
workers who lack family and community roots that would seriously undermine
efforts to integrate new immigrants into the American way of life.

There have come assurances from those advocating for the compromise that
the "merit system" can still honor the tradition of family values. But from
a look at the way points will be allocated under the new system, I don't
believe that to be the case. 75% of the points are allocated for education
and skills, 15% for English proficiency, and only 10% of the points are
allocated for family ties.

Link to Draft Copy of Bill - The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and
Immigration Reform Act of 2007

The following is the breakdown of the point allocations under the new merit
system.

It comes from a draft copy of the legislation that is unverified and my not
be complete but does give us an idea of how those working on the
legislation are looking at the different areas and how they plan on
assessing the points.

Category

Description
Max pts

Employment

Occupation

National interest/

critical infrastructure

Employer endorsement

Experience

Age of worker

U.S. employment in Specialty Occupation

(DoL definition) -- 20 pts

U.S. employment in High Demand Occupation

(BLS largest 10-yr job growth, top 30) -- 16 pts

U.S. employment in STEM or health occupation, current for at least 1 year
-- 8 pts (extraordinary or ordinary)

A U.S. employer willing to pay 50% of LPR application fee either 1) offers
a job, or 2) attests for a current employee -- 6 pts

Years of work for U.S. firm -- 2 pts/year (max 10 pts)

Workers age: 25-39 -- 3 pts

47

Education

(terminal degree)

M.D., M.B.A., Graduate degree, etc. -- 20 pts

Bachelors degree -- 16 pts

Associates degree -- 10 pts

High School diploma or GED -- 6 pts

Completed certified Perkins Vocational Education program -- 5 pts

Completed DoL Registered Apprenticeship -- 8 pts

STEM, assoc & above -- 8 pts

28

English & civics

Native speaker of English or

TOEFL score of 75 or higher -- 15 pts

TOEFL score of 60-74 -- 10 pts

Pass USCIS Citizenship Tests in English&Civics--6 pts

15

Extended family

(Applied if threshold of 55 in above categories.)

Adult (21 or older) son or daughter of USC -- 8 pts

Adult (21 or older) son or daughter of LPR -- 6 pts

Sibling of USC or LPR -- 4 pts

If had applied for a family visa in any of the above categories after May
1, 2005-- 2 pts

10

100

Supplemental schedule for Zs

Agriculture National

Interest

U.S. employment exp.

Home ownership

Medical Insurance

Worked in agriculture for 3 years, 150 days per year -- 21 pts

Worked in agriculture for 4 years (150 days for 3 years, 100 days for 1
year) -- 23 pts

Worked in agriculture for 5 years, 100 days per year -- 25 points

Year of lawful employment -- 1 pt (max 15pts)

Own place of residence -- 1 pt/year owned (max 5pts)

Current medical insurance for entire family (5pts)

To see how this new system would work, not only for new applicants, but
also the millions of Z card holders who will be part of the proposed
"amnesty" program who would eventually be eligable for green cards - one
need only check the chart.

A 25 year old foreign applicant with a job prospect, a high school diploma
and limited or no English proficiency would receive 15 pts ...par for the
course for most unskilled workers from Mexico or Central America (and most
traditional immigrants for the last 100 years)...If he/she never finished
high school..knock that down to 9pts

The let's take the case of a 30 year old Z card holder with a high school
diploma, whose been employed in th US for five years, has an employer
sponsor and is now fluent in English - he/she would get a maximum of 45pts.

That's pretty indicative of the max level that most unskilled/semi-skilled
worker could attain.

Even someone here 15 years with the same qualifications as our 30 year old
plus owning his/her own home and carrying family health insurance would max
out at 65 pts.

Compare this to a recent college graduate with a BA from anywhere in the
world (16pts), who also spoke English (15pts) and could compete in any of
the top 30 fastest growing professions in the nation (16pts), and a willing
employer (8pts) ... they would start with a minimum of 55pts.

Add in higher degree, STEM, and a specialty employment and that number goes
up to 71 pts...before setting foot in the country

The legislation doesn't mention any parameters as how the merit system
"grades" would effect these two applicants, but it's safe to assume that
with a finite number of green cards available each year, the low-skilled
workers from areas like Mexico and Central America who currently make up
the bulk of both legal and undocumented workers would end up somewhere on
the bottom of the priority list.

It is quite clear that this is a dramatic change from the family based
immigration of the past 40 years. It is also quite clear that it is meant
to change the demographic make-up of future immigration. ...favoring
high-skilled people who speak English over the working-people and the poor
that have made up the bulk of the immigrant population for over two hundred
years.

For more detailed information on how the merit system will work and how it
will effect future immigration demographics see: MPI releases data on merit
based point systems for immigration

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.prlog.org/10017827-legals-first-immigration-voice.html

Legals First - Immigration Voice

ImmigrationVoice, an organization representing skilled legal immigrants,
with a membership exceeding 12000, has serious reservations with the
proposed Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of
2007.

Source: Immigration Voice
May 22, 2007 15:12:45

(PRLog.Org) -- Immigration Voice announced today its massive phone campaign
to US Senators to put Legals First. Aman Kapoor, founder of Immigration
Voice, denounced the "grand compromise" plan of the US Senate favoring the
illegals over the highly skilled legal immigrants waiting patiently in
line.

"The high skilled legal immigration system is broken," said Mr. Kapoor,
"This compromise further alienates us in spite of us being here legally.
These are the worst set of immigration policies for high skilled immigrants
in the civilized world."

The Senators that have crafted the new merit based system have announced
that this model follows the legal immigration pathway developed in Canada
and Australia, but the compromises that have been made have deluded the
entire system into a cesspool of half baked immigration ideas.

As an example, an agriculture worker can earn 25 points for working 100
days a year for 5 years, while a skilled individual will get 10 points for
working the same number of years! Economic contribution by the undocumented
is recognized by awarding points for property ownership but not for people
working legally!

While media has been touting how the new points based system eliminates the
traditional family values based approach of American immigration, an
analysis of the bill shows that employment-based petitions were reduced
from 140,000 per year to 90,000 per year to "clear the backlog."
Family-based categories were limited to 250,000 but now have been increased
to 567,000 per year!

In addition, close to 100,000 of these applicants languishing in backlog
will be forced to restart the process in the new system. "We have been
waiting patiently for the Congress to come together and fashion a bill that
comprehensively overhauls the immigration system for the illegals, what the
Senate has done is granted amnesty on the backs of highly skilled US
educated legal immigrants," said Mr. Kapoor.

"The immigration law currently is as complicated as the Tax Code. While the
intentions of the Senators might have been good to streamline the
immigration process, the current compromise on the Comprehensive
Immigration Reform shows the world that high skilled immigrants are not
welcome in this great country."

Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org) is a non-profit national
grassroots organization committed to feasible solutions to a broken
employment-based immigration process. Immigration Voice is advocating for
technical changes that will improve the quality of life of several
individuals that are stuck in the backlogs/delays, and help the system to
work as it was intended.

Newsletter Homepage:
http://www.JobDestruction.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Support this Newsletter and www.JobDestruction.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Be removed from this mailing list, reply to this
email with UNSUbSCRIBE in the subject window

Back to archives