>One of the factors evaluated for h1b approval is whether or not the immigrant's salary is higher than the mean wages for U.S. citizens working in the same SOC category in the same area.

You can make many valid arguments for loosening the American immigration laws; but driving up the average wage because that's what the government mandate assumes that companies are irrational. A profit-maximizing company is only going to hire a H1B if they are cheaper than a US citizen per unit work.

(You could make an argument that increased immigration drives up wages by generally increasing economic activity in the destination country, sure... but that's a rather different argument.)

> A profit-maximizing company is only going to hire a H1B if they are cheaper than a US citizen per unit work.

Not true. What if the company can't find a qualified candidate? Then what they pay will likely be higher than the average worker in that industry. That's how salaries go up.

All right, they are only going to hire a H1B if they are cheaper than an available US citizen per unit work.

And you can't say "there are no US citizens available". Of course there are... for the right price.

Now you've got a question. Is the price excessive because there are too few US citizen workers available in that field? Or are the companies just being cheap and trying to drive down the price of skilled workers? In an environment of heavy lobbying, with very persuasive people trying to make their case, how can the government objectively tell which is going on?

> For the right price

Sure, if you attract them away from their current job. Then what happens to the company that had their employee taken away?

My point is that an immigrant isn't necessarily cheaper. I'm one of those immigrants on an H1B working in the US that isn't cheaper than an equivalent US worker.

>Sure, if you attract them away from their current job. Then what happens to the company that had their employee taken away?

As a hiring manager? that is not my concern. But from a societal perspective, there are a few things the company that is outbid can do.

1. they can raise their own wages.

Note, this does increase the availability of workers through several mechanisms. most obviously, more people will enter the field as wages go up, but that takes a while. More immediately? you have people that have the skills who can also do another job.

For example, my partner does embedded linux development, mostly on arm. But, my partner could also do my job (I'm a SysAdmin) - and usually do it rather better than I am. Right now, the embedded stuff pays about 10% more than the sort of sysadmin gigs I can get, reflecting the required skills. But if there were suddenly more demand for SysAdmins? if you paid enough, I'm sure you could get my partner to take a SysAdmin job.

This is an important part of how Capitalisim allocates labor efficiently. Yeah, I could work as an apprentice motorcycle mechanic. I'm probably pretty good, I mean, for an apprentice. I'm not at journeyman level yet. If being a motorcycle mechanic paid better than being a SysAdmin? I'd probably spend the time and effort to get my motorcycle repair skills up to snuff.

2. they can train.

This increases the pool of workers rather more quickly than increasing wages. This is what I do when I need to hire technical people, and I can't afford market rates. Find people that you think have the attributes to do the job, once they have some help and practice.

From a corporate perspective, both of these things are just a matter of money. And so is going through the work to get a H1B.

>My point is that an immigrant isn't necessarily cheaper. I'm one of those immigrants on an H1B working in the US that isn't cheaper than an equivalent US worker.

Yeah, this hasn't been my experience. My experience is that outside of the contracting houses[1] or teams where you have a bunch of H1B types from the same place - if the same people that hired the Americans hire a single H1B on to a team of Americans, either the H1B is technically better, or he or she is willing to work a lot harder under worse conditions, or he or she is willing to take less money. Otherwise putting up with the paperwork and language barrier is not worth it.

It makes sense that someone working under a H1B would be willing to work harder; My understanding is that if you are fired, you have 15 days to find a new job or leave the country. Regardless of your financial ability, that sounds like a real pain in the ass.

[1]The only rational explanation for the high price and low quality of contracting houses that I can see is that someone is getting pretty huge kickbacks.

That company that lost an employee should have been paying them more. Any company paying below market rates will have problems retaining their best employees.

Only for fungible labor.

Many skilled positions have scarcity, and employers are willing to pay more for an immigrant if their skillset is a better fit and/or can fill the position immediately.

>Only for fungible labor.

Oh come now. All of us are fungible. None of us are irreplaceable (at least not to our employers.)

I don't think you fully understand what fungible means.

Can a janitor do your job? No? Then your labor is not fungible.

Can you do a janitor's job? Yes? Then that's fungible labor.

Most blue collar labor is fungible - meaning that just about any person who is not incapacitated can do it.

>Most blue collar labor is fungible - meaning that just about any person who is not incapacitated can do it.

I think you underestimate the skill and training required for many blue-collar professions.

I probably have apprentice-level skills as a plumber, an electrician and as a mechanic. I know enough to say with some authority that it would take years for me to get to journeyman level. I don't think the average person could be a really good programmer, and I don't think the average person could be a really good master mechanic, either.

I never said anything about the skilled trades, I said janitor. You're just splitting hairs now.