Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2007 13:31:59 -0800 From: Norm Matloff To: Norm Matloff Subject: EU member statements debunk Craig Barrett's deceptive op-ed To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter In October some politicians in the European Union attracted attention with a proposal for a "blue card," ostensibly analogous to U.S. green cards. Immediately the industry lobbyists in the U.S. warned that we would "lose" in the "competition" with the EU for the world's tech talent. Last week the Washington Post ran an op-ed by Intel's Craig Barrett, enclosed below, in which he again warns that the silicon sky is about to fall: The European Union took a step recently that the U.S. Congress can't seem to muster the courage to take. By proposing a simple change in immigration policy, E.U. politicians served notice that they are serious about competing with the United States and Asia to attract the world's top talent to live, work and innovate in Europe. With Congress gridlocked on immigration, it's clear that the next Silicon Valley will not be in the United States. There is so much wrong in these three sentences that it's difficult to decide where to start. Well, let's note first that Barrett is dead wrong about the politics. Yes, some EU politicians have indeed proposed a more liberal immigration policy for tech workers, but so have some American politicians--as Barrett well knows, since he and his pals lavish so much in campaign contributions to those politicians for that very purpose. Second, though in that passage and most of Barrett's piece he gives readers the impression that the EU blue card is close to a done deal (his in-passing disclaimer at the end notwithstanding), enactment of the proposal is unlikely, as the second article enclosed below shows. Politicians in the EU are just as skittish about immigration as their U.S. counterparts. In fact, contrary to Barrett's theme, the EU statements quoted in the article are far more pro-worker than what we are seeing in the U.S., with only a handful of members of Congress having the courage to question the industry's claims on H-1B and employer-sponsored green cards. Technically, Barrett ought to be writing in Le Monde or Der Spiegel, chastizing those anti-blue European politicos for their "nativism" compared to the U.S. Most importantly, there is Barrett's implicit assumption that this "competition" is one that the U.S. ought to engage in. I strongly support bringing in what Barrett calls the "top minds" of the world, but the vast majority of the foreign workers are brought in for cheap labor, certainly not something we should compete for. (See my analysis of Intel H-1B prevailing wages at http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/IntelH1BWages.txt) And as to the "top minds," they are NOT waiting 5-10 years for a green card as Barrett asserts. Currently there is no wait for the top category, EB-1 ("foreign nationals of extraordinary ability"), and a wait of 2-3 years for Chinese and Indians in the second tier, EB-2 (for those who are either of "exceptional ability" or who possess an "advanced degree"). It is only in the lowest category, EB-3, which has no special ability requirement, that there are long waits. Barrett is not above even including statements whose misleading nature would be obvious to any careful reader, such as the squib at the end: The writer is chairman of Intel Corp., which employs about 2,000 employees with H-1B visas among its 86,000 workers worldwide. Clearly it's wrong to compare the number of H-1Bs, who work only in the U.S., to Intel's worldwide body count. It wouldn't even be right to compare to the number of U.S. Intel workers, as that would include all the clerical, marketing, accounting and other nontechnical workers. The proper comparison would be H-1Bs to workers in categories of jobs held by H-1Bs, i.e. engineers and programmers, and there the fraction would be quite substantial. Barrett is both misleading and incorrect here: To be competitive in the global economy, U.S. companies depend on specialized talent coming out of U.S. graduate schools. These scientists and engineers are often foreign-born, as more than half of U.S. engineering master's students and PhD recipients are international students. First of all, the fraction at the master's level is about a third, not a half. Second, workers with advanced degrees are so important to Intel, why is its median prevailing wage claim in the mid-$60K range? The national median salary for American workers with a Master's in engineering is $82,333, and the median for an engineering PhD is $105,500. And again if Intel needs people with advanced degrees so much, why doesn't it take proactive steps to get more Americans pursuing those degrees? Back in 1998, when Intel was pushing Congress to expand the H-1B program, the firm paid a visit to my university department, offering to help us increase our undergraduate enrollment. We replied that our bachelor's student count was skyrocketing, so we didn't need help there, but it would be great if Intel could help us attract more Americans to our master's and PhD programs. INTEL REFUSED TO DO THIS, because Intel and the industry WANT there to be a heavy proportion of international students in U.S. graduate programs in engineering, so as to keep salaries down. As readers of this e-newsletter know, the National Science Foundation called upon Congress to establish the H-1B program with this explicit goal. By the way, the proposed blue card is not really analogous to our green card. It is more like a repeatedly renewable H-1B visa. A few months ago the Washington Post ran an op-ed by Bill Gates, calling for expansion of the H-1B program. Now the Post has run Barrett's piece. They've run nothing on the other side. They rejected mine, which is not so bad in view of the fact that they did run one by me in 2000, but they also refused when I suggested that they consider one by some other advocate of reducing the H-1B program, such as Prof. Ron Hira. The Post almost never runs a balanced article on H-1B these days (they ran many in 1998). Gates' wife sits on the Post's board, and though I would hate to think that that would be enough to cause the paper to squelch dissent on the H-1B issue, it is clear to me that someone has set such a policy. Norm http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101919_pf.html A Talent Contest We're Losing By Craig Barrett Sunday, December 23, 2007; B07 The European Union took a step recently that the U.S. Congress can't seem to muster the courage to take. By proposing a simple change in immigration policy, E.U. politicians served notice that they are serious about competing with the United States and Asia to attract the world's top talent to live, work and innovate in Europe. With Congress gridlocked on immigration, it's clear that the next Silicon Valley will not be in the United States. European politicians face many of the same political pressures surrounding immigration as their U.S. counterparts, and they, too, are not immune to these pressures. Nationalist and anti-immigrant factions in several Western European countries have made political gains in recent elections and are widely viewed as mainstream. Despite the hot-button nature of immigration issues, though, E.U. politicians advanced the "Blue Card" proposal in October. The plan is designed to attract highly educated workers by creating a temporary but renewable two-year visa. A streamlined application process allows qualified prospective workers to navigate the system and start working in high-need jobs within one to three months. This contrasts starkly with the byzantine system in place in the United States, which increasingly threatens America's long-term competitiveness. The United States relies primarily on two programs to augment the U.S. workforce with highly educated, highly skilled foreign professionals. The H-1B visa is a three-year temporary visa that can be renewed once. The employment-based (EB) green card is the program for permanent residency. Both programs serve the needs of U.S. employers seeking to fill job vacancies in highly skilled professions. Extreme shortages of visas in both these programs are well documented. H-1B visas, which are capped at 85,000 per year, are now gone in one day, with the "winners" determined by lottery. The EB green card program has an annual allotment of 140,000 visas; these are allocated equally across all countries around the world, regardless of population. The inflexible country quotas mean that professionals from countries such as China and India are almost always at a disadvantage, finding themselves stuck in a system -- often for five to 10 years -- in which they cannot seek promotions and raises. Spouses and children count against the quota, which has not been raised since 1990. And even though they count against the quota of foreign workers allowed to come here, spouses are inexplicably forbidden to work, no matter their level of education and skill. The U.S. system forces thousands of valuable foreign-born professionals -- including badly needed researchers, scientists, teachers and engineers -- into legal and professional limbo for years. Not surprisingly, many are considering opportunities in competitor nations -- even those who have lived in the United States for years and have graduated from American universities. To be competitive in the global economy, U.S. companies depend on specialized talent coming out of U.S. graduate schools. These scientists and engineers are often foreign-born, as more than half of U.S. engineering master's students and PhD recipients are international students. Yet America shuts the door on many of these highly educated graduates, forcing them to look abroad for opportunities -- and our competitors are capitalizing on our failed policies. E.U. leaders recognize that the top minds coming out of universities in the United States and other countries can help to reinvigorate European industry and enable it to create the next wave of businesses that drive innovation and economic growth. While its Blue Card proposal still requires approval by member countries, Europe has sent a message. It intends to aggressively pursue the professional talent necessary to compete on the global stage. The United States, on the other hand, seems intent on driving away the very same talent the European Union is rolling out the red carpet to welcome. The writer is chairman of Intel Corp., which employs about 2,000 employees with H-1B visas among its 86,000 workers worldwide. http://www.manufacturing.net/EU-Worker-Visa-Plans-Rebuffed.aspx EU Worker Visa Plans Rebuffed By Constant Brand, Associated Press Writer Manufacturing.Net - December 06, 2007 BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) — Germany and other countries poured cold water Thursday on proposals meant to lure educated migrants to the European Union while cracking down on illegal workers. Doubts over granting European Union officials more say in immigration policy resurfaced at a combined meeting of justice, interior and employment ministers, who face increasing pressure to respond to migration and labor trends. The union has a growing shortage of skilled and educated labor but faces increased flows of often uneducated migrants from Africa and Asia. While all 27 EU governments have accepted the need to cooperate more closely on immigration, agreeing on specific plans is painfully slow. Germany's employment minister, Olaf Scholz, said plans drafted by the European Commission to set up a common workers visa program to attract educated labor were not needed. ''We have 3.5 million unemployed and that means that companies can find workers within Germany,'' Scholz said. He said specific shortages should be addressed on a sector-by-sector basis on national level, without Brussels having a say. Scholz suggested EU nations also look to new eastern European members of the union for professionals to fill gaps. Citizens from new EU members are currently barred from working freely in some western EU countries, under transition clauses in their membership agreements. Those rules were set up because older members feared they would be hit by a wave of cheap labor. The plan to set up a European ''Blue Card'' workers visa program, styled after the U.S. ''Green Card'' permit, has raised doubts in several nations. Austria, the Netherlands and Britain also voiced concerns over whether the EU should handle such a program, officials said. Spain expressed fears the program would cause a ''brain drain'' from Africa. Greece and Malta called for more protection from illegal migrants on the EU's southern borders. The EU plan calls for governments to institute a ''one-stop-shop'' visa application, offering qualified job seekers a simpler way to get jobs within the EU, doing away with 27 different, often complex, national procedures. Franco Frattini, the EU's justice and interior affairs commissioner, who drafted the plan, argued an EU-wide system is needed to ensure Europe can compete with trade rivals like the United States, Canada or Australia, all of which use special work permits to attract professionals. ''I continue to be convinced that common rules to regulate people entering the EU are necessary,'' Frattini said. ''I don't believe Germany is against this principle.'' Germany also criticized Frattini's plans for an EU system of fines and other penalties for employers who hire illegal workers. Frattini said, however, that such rules are needed to prevent the entry of illegal migrants who are often exploited and mistreated. European nations are struggling to cope with the arrival of up to half a million illegals a year, many brought in by human trafficking rings. The EU nations have been haggling over how to draft a common asylum and immigration policy since 1999 and have set a 2010 deadline by which to approve common rules. A review of progress made to date is to be made by EU leaders at a summit in Brussels next week.