ok so you are back. CIS is not USCIS its center for immigration studies, a non profit immigration think tank(a reputed center for immigration studies not some anti immigrant rant shop). The report states that employers are paying the prevailing wage according to their own surveys which is far below the wage stated by other sources. Though John Miano may be anti H1, I don't doubt his statistics and sources, they are very similar to what I have observed in industry. May be you have to believe what others are sayingJoeF said:You are not quite up-to-date...
The people who tried to destroy this forum were banned...
As for your link, that's not "the" CIS. US government sites end in .gov, and CIS is uscis.gov.
If you are on H1 and don't get at least the prevailing wage, you can complain to DOL: http://www.dol.gov/esa/forms/whd/WH-4.pdf
Companies that don't pay the prevailing wage violate the laws.
Similarly, for the GC job offer, the salary has to be the higher of the salary listed in the LC and the prevailing wage.
So, what exactly is the problem?
And after just glancing at the article you linked to, it is obvious that "you have been had"...
The author, John Miano, is a well-known anti-immigrant and anti-H1 person. He is the founder of the anti-H1 outfit "Programmers Guild": http://programmersguild.org/founders.asp
So, the article doesn't prove your point. On the contrary. If that is all you can find...
DOL does not have to approve these surveys. The employer only needs to maintain documentation (http://www.murthy.com/news/UDrecreq.html). Also he has provided raw data, so he seems convincing (http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1305appendices.pdf)JoeF said:He obviously has an agenda, and because of that, his statistics are highly suspicious. Until he provides the raw data, his conclusions have to be considered flawed.
An example: While industry surveys are allowed, DOL has to approve the surveys, to ensure that they are not providing false data. So, the basic premise of the article, that industry surveys provide lower wage data, is already flawed.
In fact, this is a well-known charge by anti-H1 people, and everybody who knows anything about this stuff laughs at that.
It was much better when you were not in this forum. You seem to have little clue on how DOL or USCIS works and you are in an idealistic world of your own. Do you really think these wage surveys are OK ? Complain to DOL, ha ha ha, they took 5yrs to get PERM implemented and still screw around for several years before approving an LC. BTW the appendix has raw data and you seriously need a course in statistics to understand them. Why don't you read that article completely, he has explained the logic in detail..JoeF said:The article at murthy.com states:
"There are other detailed requirements in the DOL regulations regarding these sources."
and
"The employer may be called upon to prove the legitimacy of the source."
So, anybody who thinks the surveys an employer use are not ok can complain to DOL. I wonder why the anti-H1 people like John Miano do not do that... That's of course a rethorical question. They know very well that their assertions don't hold water. They are just hoping to find clueless people who believe their charges.
Again and again, if you or anybody else knows of H1 wrongdoing, complain to DOL. Here is the form again: http://www.dol.gov/esa/forms/whd/WH-4.pdf
Anything else is just ranting without any reason.
Oh boy, there is so much wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin...
That's anything but raw data. That's processed data. It has percentages etc. Raw data is the data and the formulas used to arrive at these percentages.
Furthermore, listing wages for states is completely meaningless. Salaries in rural areas are of course lower than in cities, just as the cost of living is lower in rural areas than in cities. There are even significant differences between cities. Salaries in San Diego, for example, are different than salaries in the Bay area...
Quite frankly, I suggest you take a course in statistics.