There is very little coverage of which politicians are supporting further enlarging the H1-B program.
We analyze the politicians that are c0-sponsoring the bill.
There is an immigration bill referred to as H.R.1044. This bill is close to impossible to determine what the bill will do by reading the bill. This is intended so that the public cannot know what the bill will do. However, the lobbyist firms most certainly know what the bill does, and in most cases, it is the lobbyists that write the bills.
The lobbyists, which are the shadow government in the US, then explain or misexplain the bill to those that vote on it. It is intensely important to the lobbyists that any bill that they write be unintelligible to the population. This way the bills are encoded so that any critics of these bills will be confused when they read the bill. This is explained in the following quotation on how Obamacare was written.
We took the most complex health care system…and made it 10 times more complex. Why did Obama’s team choose to go this route? One explanation is suggested by the infamous remarks of Obamacare consultant Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economist who was videotaped telling an academic conference in 2013 that the law was deliberately “written in a tortured way” with a “lack of transparency” that was meant to confuse evaluators and thus get it past tte clueless and bewildered public. – Listen Liberal
Those Politicians That Either Sponsored or Cosponsored the Bill
The following table shows which politicians sponsored or cosponsored recent bills that expanded the H1-B program.
The bill’s full names are as follows.
H.R. 1044: Fairness for High Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019
S.2344: Immigration Innovation Act of 2018
H.R.1303: H1B and L1 Visa Reform Act of 2017
H.R. 392: Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2017
And all of the bills had no lobbying and zero input from domestic workers. The bills were also not covered in the US media except in the most cursory manner. When it comes to bills, it appears that the elected representatives only interact with companies and lobbyists that pay to visit with them — which brings up the question of what is the purpose of holding elections in the first place.
The system is clear in that only companies and foreign workers should have any input into the IT immigration policy.
The views of domestic workers are not valued and not discussed.
Everyone on this list should be considered anti-domestic IT worker. Even well known progressive-leaning politicians like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Tulsi Gabbard are shown co-sponsoring H1-B expansion bills. If there is one thing most of the elective officials can agree on — it is labor exploitation.
Now…No US Political Party Represents Workers
At one point in US history, Democrats were the party of labor, and Republicans were the party of the corporations and the well off. However, when reviewing the sponsors and cosponsors of these H1-B expanding bills, there seems to be little difference between the two parties.
This is a story well explained in the book Listen Liberal. But for several decades Democrats have been far more comfortable spending time with Wall Street and in the Hamptons that talking to working people. Once the labor unions were killed in the US, the Democrats aggressively turned their back on workers and went for the same funding sources as Republicans.
If you are a worker in the US, you have no party that you can vote for that will look out for your interests versus employers. Candidates like Bernie Sanders that support workers, are thoroughly reviled by the Democrat establishment. This came through the emails that were provided by Wikileaks that told us all kinds of disgusting things about the DNC.
Establishment Democrats prefer to associate with big-money donors and to support policies that damage workers. This has been the policy of Democrats since at least Clinton, and actually going back to Carter who deregulated the trucking industry, turning a once well-paid profession that led to a middle-class life to a poorly paid profession with a very low quality of working conditions.
A major issue with the H1-B program is that there is little discussion about the program. Therefore, it is not framed as an anti-domestic worker bill.
The Media Coverage of H1-B Expanding Bills
The following is a typical article that is a paid placement in Forbes titled Recent Changes To The H1B Visa Program And What Is Coming In 2019 and which – naturally – encourages support for H.R.1044. Mr. Semotuik would have paid to have this article placed in Forbes and as Forbes is owned by a Chinese construction firm as we cover in the article Can You Trust IDC and Their Now China Based Owners? and has stopped editing its content or even paying for writers, they will let anyone rent out their space for the right price.
The first thing to realize is that the author Andy J. Semotuik is an immigration attorney. That means of course that the more IT immigrants that come into the country, the more money he makes. And of course, as an attorney, he also has a lot of experience arguing falsely, a talent his uses in this article.
Let us observe from quotes from this article.
Nearly half of Fortune 500 companies were founded by first or second-generation immigrants and no doubt, many were former H1-B visa holders.
Semotuik seems to imply that immigrants are more innovative than non-immigrants. Secondly, by extending the definition to “second-generation immigrants” Semotuik expand the number of Fortune 500 companies founded by immigrants. Note to Semotuik, people who are second-generation are not immigrants — see definition of who is an who is not an immigrant. How about companies started by people who are third, fourth or fifth generation immigrants? As is not immigrants at all?
According to a recent report, U.S. tech giants like Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Intel are among the top 10 employers of approved H-1B applicants.
And if the had not been able to hire these H1-B applicants, those jobs and opportunities would have gone to domestic workers. Furthermore, these companies, that have more money than God were able to pay less for these workers, and these workers are owned by these companies as the last thing these workers want to do is go back to their own country, and the H1-B program is a form of control over workers that literally any company would love to impose over domestic workers — if only it weren’t illegal.
That means that the benefits of the US economy in this situation were given to non-Americans over Americans.
It is curious that Semotuik does not observe this point. This might be because Semotuik makes no money on US workers (who unfortunately already have the right to work in the US) but Semotuik does make money on H1-B workers.
U.S. educators have established without doubt that the entry of foreign-born scientists and engineers remains an unmatched source of “strength and vitality” for the country’s tech industry.
The strength and vitality fo the tech industry seems strongly based upon lower paid workers who are controlled by the H1-B program. I worked with a consulting firm that had 100% H1-B labor. Cognizant, Wipro, TATA, and Infosys are primarily Indian companies whose employees composition has nothing to do with the rest of the country. This is sleazy firms that damage the companies that hire them. Is this the “strength and vitality” that Semotuik is referring to? Would Google and Facebook’s “strength and vitality” be sapped if they had to hire these employees in their home country? Why is it necessary for US domestic workers to be constantly at threat of replacement by Indian workers in order for these companies to maintain their “strength and vitality.” Finally, do we need to hear from an attorney, who likely has no other technology understanding that opening Word documents and answering e-mail as to what is necessary for technology vitality?
A loss of foreign employees in the tech sector could result in considerable competition from overseas companies. Because graduates from American colleges would help foreign companies compete against U.S. firms.
This is curious, because what is the definition of “loss” of foreign employees in the tech sector exactly? All of these companies have offices in multiple countries — how do companies lose the opportunities to hire these people simply if they cannot immigrate to the US. There is no law that restricts companies from hiring foreign workers in their home country. H1-B is about people coming in from overseas to take jobs that would normally go to Americans. Jobs that Americans have the citizen first right to receive, and that companies should be training them to do if there is something they want to be done that is not within their experience to do.
Foreign companies cannot outbid US firms if those employees were hired overseas.
Everyone knows that the US multinationals get first dibs, and then those lower on the hiring preference chain goto the Indian companies. Semotuik falsely sets up a construct whereby US-based companies only hire in the US. Semotuik seems to now know how these companies hire or that they all have giant offices in India.
For one thing, securing a work visa for foreign nationals accomplished in the math and engineering fields fit for high tech has become more difficult under the “Buy America, Hire American” executive order President Trump signed in April of last year. The policy directs the Department of Homeland Security to issue H-1B visas to only the most-skilled foreigners or highest-paid beneficiaries.
That is, to issue H1-Bs to those that meet the criteria of the H1-B program?
Recall, that the original intent of the H1-B program was to only allow for “the most skilled foreigners.” Is was never supposed to be for the type of skill levels that have been flowing into the country through the H1-B program. We have recent college graduates asking if we (Brightwork) can sponsor them. There are armies of Indian people currently working in the US that come nowhere near meeting the definition of “high skilled.”
According to an NFAP source, “Employers report the time lost due to the increase in denials and Requests for Evidence has cost millions of dollars in project delays and contract penalties, while aiding competitors that operate exclusively outside the United States.”
And who is the NFAP?
Here is a screenshot of their website.
And this what they say about themselves.
The National Foundation for American Policy is a 501(c)(3), non-profit, non-partisan research organization focused on immigration, international trade and other issues related to globalization and the economy. Collectively, the organization’s research has been cited more than 100 times in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post.
The NFAP is a fake entity that has a website with almost no website volume. They don’t declare their funding, or even how they support themselves.
So I will do it for them — they are supported by companies that want to hire more H1-B workers. And they are hiding this fact. The fact that they are able to trick the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post into using quotes from them is a sad testament to how fall US media has fallen. But each of these outlets is aligned with wealthy interests (with the Washington Post being owned by Jeff Bezos, so yes, Amazon would like more H1-B laborers. Poor Jeff Bezos was only worth $130 B before his divorce, and he needs more H1-Bs to reclaim the $40 B he had to give to his wife.)
Their intent is to create articles without performing any research that can be used by people like Semotuik and designed to trick people who don’t verify sources. Here is a quote from Stuart Anderson, from the NFAP — in another paid placement in Forbes in a Forbes titled, USCIS Documents Reveal The Sources Of Trump H-1B Visa Restrictions.
Critics say the USCIS documents show the agency is not applying the law but coming up with ways around the law. “The documents released by USCIS reveal the way the agency has shifted its focus in these adjudications, creating more obstacles for U.S. businesses to hire and retain the talent they need,” said AILA President Marketa Lindt.
The evidence indicates USCIS has increased the regulatory burden on businesses and made U.S. companies less competitive if they need either high-skilled foreign nationals or the services they provide.
That is curious because it is quite obvious that the companies that are bringing over H1-B workers don’t qualify as sufficiently high skilled to meet the definition of the program.
So this is what Forbes is now, a place where monied interests pretend that they are writing articles out of “interest” which are simply designed to push the interests of monied interests without any disclosure of these interests or without any fact-checking. Where domestic workers are entirely left out of the conversation.
This is supported by the following quotation.
Ron Hira, a professor at Howard University who has been looking at the H-1B visa program for years says this the first time since the program began 30 years ago that the government is actually enforcing standards.
Hira pointed to a 2015 scandal in which Southern Cal Edison’s American IT workers were laid off and asked to train H-1B visa employees who took their jobs as an example of how the program is in need of reform.
“The H-1B program is rife with abuse and exploitation, but prior administrations – both GOP and Democratic – essentially rubber stamped petitions,” he said. “I’m sure employers don’t like the increased scrutiny but that doesn’t mean the government is doing anything wrong.” – San Diego Union Tribune
Yes…the first time since the H1-B program was passed that any standards are actually being enforced. And the companies are screaming bloody murder, and feel the need to pay Chinese based Forbes to air their issues with complying with the law through proxies like NFAP.
Let us take stock of where we are at this point in Semotuik’s article.
We have an immigration attorney writing an article our of his own financial bias that he paid to have carried in Forbes that is now referring to a front organization funded by big money H1-B companies who like the lower pay and high degree of control over H1-B workers and using this front organization’s findings as evidence to support H1-B expansion.
Now with that background, let us look at the quote again.
According to an NFAP source, “Employers report the time lost due to the increase in denials and Requests for Evidence has cost millions of dollars in project delays and contract penalties, while aiding competitors that operate exclusively outside the United States.”
Well, the H1-B program costs domestic workers millions of dollars in lost wages, but certainly this is little concern to Semotuik. Lost wages of domestic workers don’t come out of Semotuik’s pocket. The only thing Semotuik is concerned with is more H1-B workers coming into the country — because this is how he makes his money.
So this estimate of loss is quite unimpressive. And the entity being quoted, NFAP has no research background, is funded by H1-B employers and also barely exists as a known entity.
Then on November 19th, 2018 the U.S. Department of Labor began requiring that employers of H-1B applicants use a new Labor Condition Application form (LCA), ETA 9035. Critics claim the new form is designed to elicit internal information from employers and increase government pressure upon H-1B employed companies, with the intended possibility of negative attention from the press. The new labor conditions could deter tech companies from hiring skilled graduates abroad lest they fork out too much in annual wages, and could compel them to “hire American” in line with Trump’s new order.
What Semotuik is complaining about here is a form that has a number of questions, but two that stand out are the following that I took from the form are:
Wages: The employer shall pay nonimmigrant workers at least the prevailing wage or the employer’s actual wage, whichever is higher, and pay for non-productive time. The employer shall offer nonimmigrant workers benefits and eligibility for benefits provided as compensation for services on the same basis as the employer offers to U.S. workers. The employer shall not make deductions to recoup a business expense(s) of the employer including attorney fees and other costs connected to the performance of H-1B, H-1B1, or E-3 program functions which are required to be performed by the employer. This includes expenses related to the preparation and filing of this LCA and related visa petition information. 20 CFR 655.731; – Labor Condition Application form (LCA), ETA 9035
This clause exists because many H1-B employers were pulling these costs from their H1-B employees! This is a basic quality check on the H1-B program, and therefore, Semotuik opposes it.
(2) Working Conditions: The employer shall provide working conditions for nonimmigrants which will not adversely affect the working conditions of workers similarly employed. The employer’s obligation regarding working conditions shall extend for the duration of the validity period of the certified LCA or the period during which the worker(s) working pursuant to this LCA is employed by the employer, whichever is longer. 20 CFR 655.732; – Labor Condition Application form (LCA), ETA 9035
This translates to the immigrant workers cannot be used to bring down the working conditions of the domestic workers.
Again, this is something that Semotuik considers a problem?
If he thinks it is a problem he should say so as he clearly thinks so — use of the introduction “critics claim” is a weasly way of introducing the criticism without directly associating with it. If he agrees with these critics he should say so. If he disagrees with these critics, he should also say so. By using the introduction “critics claim” he is able to introduce a point he wants to make, in an unsourced fashion, but without taking responsibility for the point.
Who Are the Critics?
Could it be these critics are t hose companies that have to fill out this form?
I ask because it is difficult to see who else would oppose this quality test. For example, there were many critics of abolishing slavery — and the most strident critics of abolition, particularly among slave owners. So if I stated “critics claim abolishing slavery will lead to bad outcomes” it is important to declare “who” is saying this. That might lead to “why” they are saying it.
Let us review Semotuik’s complaint against the use of this form.
The new labor conditions could deter tech companies from hiring skilled graduates abroad lest they fork out too much in annual wages, and could compel them to “hire American” in line with Trump’s new order.
How would this form deter tech companies from hiring H1-Bs?
Well, if an employer is taking H1-B costs out of the H1-B candidate’s wages, then this would deter them. Secondly, if the employer using the H1-B program to reduce the labor conditions of domestic workers, this could also deter companies from hiring H1-B workers. However, in neither circumstance should these companies be hiring H1-B workers if they are doing these things.
Something to note, Indians decrease the working conditions at all the IT companies I have witnessed, and one reason is that they discriminate against domestic workers. And that is only one of many negative repercussions for domestic workers. Wait one second…
Ding Ding Ding!
Semotuik gets our prestigious Golden Pinocchio Award for stating that the most basic quality check on the H1-B program is onerous and a terrible injustice to H1-B employers.
For example, they accounted for 82 per cent of H-1B visas in 2016. Indian workers specifically are known to specialize in IT-related jobs, helping fill the gaps in the tech industry.
How does Semotuik know if Indian workers fill in gaps? Does this come from his nonexistent experience working technology? When he has a problem figuring out how is email works and has to be told to hit the “refresh” button on his browser, is this what he imagines is the issue in the technology sector. I have worked with some of the highest paid software patent attorneys, only to find out that they thought applications sat on a data warehouse. Therefore, it is humorous to listen to attorneys, who again are normally challenged by their iPads make declarative statements about technology.
The US has a very high number of skilled domestic workers. There can always be said to be a “gap” that needs to be filled. But previously companies to provide training to their employees. Now training is very rarely provided and employers expect even the newest skills to be immediately available in the market. For example, because SAP lies to customers so much about how commonly their products are used, I receive requests for skills that don’t exist in the market. For example, with the application S/4HANA, SAP claims a number of implementations that are greatly inflated, which means the skills are greatly inflated.
We are currently in the middle of a massive bubble in AI/data science/machine learning, with projects being sold on the basis of false pretenses. IBM has been massively exaggerating their ability to add value with AI/data science/machine learning. After failing in their own internal AI project as we cover in the article How IBM is Distracting from the Watson Failure to Sell More AI, they are still happy to sell and fail on AI projects, a fact they are currently trying to explain to many customers as we cover in the article How Many AI Projects Will Fail Due to a Lack of Data?
In the corporate-controlled media, a “gap” is whatever a company says it is. There is no questioning of the gap, the degree to which companies could provide training, whether the gap is real or based on some sales initiated bubble, etc. Gaps are easy to create if every gap can be used to justify bringing in more compliant Indian workers to work under an H1-B for 10 years or more, “gaps” will begin appearing amazingly quickly. If the assumption is that every employee has years of experience in every new technology before the technology has even become broadly used — once again, “gaps” will magically appear. I personally notice gaps in IT management all the time. I track and record stupid IT decisions that continually scratch my head at how bad they are.
Could we bring in people from the Netherlands to replace most of the CIOs and IT directors in the country? Because we have serious gaps (real gaps, not fake gaps) in our IT decision making.
Overall, Semotuik’s idiotic and manipulative article that is only intended to get him immigrant legal business was read over 360,000 times according to the Forbes counter on the article. Throughout the article, Semotuik spends exactly zero effort considering the side of domestic workers in this debate. Everything is about either what Indian immigrants want, what corporations want, and what — immigration attorneys want. And this is par for the course in articles about the H1-B program. They are mostly written by entities with a financial interest, and people who have never worked in the IT sector and know next to nothing about technology.
We often have people reach out to ask what they can do to reduce Indian immigration into IT. Actually, even without any more immigration from India, domestic workers face significant discrimination by Indians as we cover in the article How Indian IT Workers Discriminate Against Non-Indian Workers. However, the more Indians that immigrate to the US, the worse the discrimination will become. But at least a starting point for domestic workers is to reach out to the representatives on this list and contact them to tell them that you disapprove of both the H1-B program and any expansion of the program. Another question to ask is if any of these representatives have concern for workers, why do they continue to pass anti-domestic IT legislation like the bills listed in this article.
This is an excellent video on H1-B abuse that you won’t find explained in Forbes.
There is an extremely one-sided lobbying for the H.R.1044 immigration bill by monied interests.
We analyze the entities and the motivations of the lobbying support.
There is an immigration bill referred to as H.R.1044. In another article, I will review what 1044 actually does to loosen the rules around immigration. Notice this excerpt from the bill illustrates that the bill is virtually impossible to understand.
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection and notwithstanding title II of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.), the following rules shall apply:
(A) For fiscal year 2020, 15 percent of the immigrant visas made available under each of paragraphs (2), (3), and (5) of section 203(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b)) shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that is not one of the two states with the largest aggregate numbers of natives who are beneficiaries of approved petitions for immigrant status under such paragraphs.
(B) For fiscal year 2021, 10 percent of the immigrant visas made available under each of such paragraphs shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that is not one of the two states with the largest aggregate numbers of natives who are beneficiaries of approved petitions for immigrant status under such paragraphs.
(C) For fiscal year 2022, 10 percent of the immigrant visas made available under each of such paragraphs shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of a foreign state or dependent area that is not one of the two states with the largest aggregate numbers of natives who are beneficiaries of approved petitions for immigrant status under such paragraphs.
This is intended so that the public cannot know what the bill will do. However, the lobbyist firms most certainly know what the bill does, and in most cases, it is the lobbyists that write the bills. The lobbyists, which are the shadow government in the US, then explain or misexplain the bill to those that vote on it. Generally, the bill reallocates more of the H1-B visas to IT, immigrant workers.
This is explained in the following quotation.
Everyone knows what our immigration system should look like. It should only be high skilled – real high skilled – based on a merit points system, not just for education, but also for patriotic assimilation. Then, once they are here, they should be free to work anywhere. Instead, we have a system that is mainly unskilled chain migration with the “skilled” portion of it being monopolized by visa pork to specific corporations for workers who aren’t even that high skilled, mainly entry-level IT jobs for tech companies. The bill that was rushed through the House and is now being slammed on the floor of the Senate without a hearing simply exacerbates this system.
On July 10, the Democrat-controlled House passed HR 1044, the Orwellian-named “Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019,” which abolished the per-country annual cap on employment-based green cards. Less than one-third of Republicans opposed the legislation. The bill does the opposite of fairness because the existing broken H-1B non-immigrant visa program is monopolized by not very high skilled Indian workers, and those would be the people flooding the green cards for the next 10 years. USCIS estimates that if this bill is enacted, Indian workers will control 90% of all employment-based green cards for the next 10 years.
In other words, the same way our family-based visa system is broken because it allows immigrants to choose who is brought in based on family ties and not Americans choosing the best fit, the employment-based system allows a handful of the most powerful liberal companies to bring in the people they want for their jobs with no regard for the rest of the country.
It’s not to say that we don’t have more specialized workers from India as well, but the dysfunctional H1-B system has flooded the “high skilled” visas with entry level tech jobs that could be done by Americans. By chewing up all the green cards on those in the H-1B system, it will make it impossible to bring in truly high skilled people.
Talk about foreign influence! This is an India-first bill.
Everyone knows what is going to happen if this bill passes. They will pocket the massive expansion of Indian low-to-mid-level workers and then come back crying about the inevitable problems it creates by boxing out other companies, applicants from other countries, and higher skilled immigrants. The result? Another bill to expand immigration even more by busting the macro cap from the existing record levels without any effort to cut any other part of the dead wood in the immigration system.
Yet, shockingly, Sen. Mike Lee, Utah, asked for unanimous consent to pass this bill (S.386) last week, which he is co-sponsoring with Sen. Kamala Harris, bypassing any committee process.
This bill makes no sense from any philosophical standpoint on immigration other than the fact that it’s satisfying the companies with the most political clout, such as Apple, Amazon, Google, and Facebook. Then again, that is how our entire immigration politics has worked in recent years. – Conservative Review
In this article, I want to focus on who is supporting this bill and why.
Don’t Discuss the Lobbyists?
Conversations around immigration into IT jobs tend to be kept abstract and built on talking points related to “shared prosperity” and “skills.” What is almost never mentioned — in fact not a single person has brought this subject up with me even generally much less specifically is who is lobbying for more immigration under the skilled candidate program. For some strange reason, this is kept as quiet as possible.
The List from Open Secrets
Imagine my surprise when I checked the website Open Secrets for who is supporting the H.R.1004 bill, called the “Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019.” Notice it is not called the “Fairness for Domestic Skilled Worker Act of 2019,” because the concern for domestic workers is never a concern for the entities that we will be discussing. It is now considered mandatory to name any bill something positive, which is a way of hiding what bills actually do.
We can learn a lot about this bill by observing who is spending lobbying dollars trying to get the bill passed. Let us review the table below where each lobbying entity is named, as well as the number of lobbyists. This is an aggregation of the information provided by Open Secrets. We then describe each lobbying entity.
# of Lobbyists
Advanced Policy Consulting LLC
A small lobbying company. Their website did not work properly, so we could not find their clients.
AG Kaffes & Associates
Appears to be a one man operation run by Andrew G. Kaffes. Looking at his listing of accomplishments, if there was a bad piece of legislation, he lobbied on its behalf.
Giant tech company. In 2018 Amazon's lobbying had $16,999,000 in lobbying spend. Seems like someone was trying to stay below $17 M for the year.
American Immigration Lawyers Association
Firm that provides legal services to immigrants. They are a small player averaging $100,000 in spend for 2018/2019.
American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics
A small industry focused lobbying entity with a tiny yearly lobbying income.
Americans for Prosperity
A conservative lobbying group that had $265,000 in lobbying spend for 2018. This is one of the few entities where it is no clear if they were pro or con. Its is unlikely they did much lobbying as this is not major issue for them.
Giant tech company. Spent around $1.25 M in 2018 in all lobbying spend.
Association of American Universities
This one was odd -- but it matches the fact there are several universities on this list of lobbying firms.
Bipartisan Policy Center Advocacy Network
A tiny lobbying entity
Averages around $100,000 per year in total lobbying spend. Brings up the question of why universities want more expansion of the "skilled" worker program.
BSA Software Alliance
This is actually primarily Microsoft. But they normally focus on licensing. They average around $2 M in total lobbying spend.
Chamber Hill Strategies
Larger lobbying entity with a spend of $2.5 M in 2018. Very concentrated in health care lobbying. Their website contains a lot of false or otherwise misleading information about health care.
Giant tech company with around $3.8 M in lobbying spend in 2018.
Cognizant Technology Solutions
Giant Indian tech consulting firm with its lobbying spend around $1.85 M in 2018. Also one of the largest importers of Indian labor into the US. They also pull more jobs out of the US with their outsourcing.
A lobbying company $700,000 in lobbying spend. Intel is listed as a client. Curiously, we could not find their website. The website corelyconsulting.com is owned by a tech firm in Memphis.
Covington & Burling
A giant lobbying firm with $17 M in spend in 2018. They count Microsoft, SAP, Qualcomm, BAE Systems and Unisys Corp as clients. Amazingly, even such a large lobbying firm is still able to have a terrible website.
Cummins spent around $3.5 M in 2018 on lobbying. Cummins is not a tech company, but a manufacturer. Notice that we have other manufacturing entities on this list.
A giant IT consulting company. For the size of the company, the 2018 spend of $2.4 M was surprising.
Large lobbying firm with $5.4 M in lobbying spend in 2018. We could find no tech companies on their list of customers. Continued the string of awful websites by lobbying firms.
Giant tech company with $14.8 M in lobbying spend in 2018, and like Amazon, distributed through many lobbyists. This makes one wonder how any laws will be passed to reign in Facebook with that lobbying spend.
Giant tech company. For some reason the data on spend only went up to 2014. But in 2014 it spent close to $21 M in lobbying. Most likely it is significantly higher in 2019.
Greenberg Traurig LLP
Big law and lobbying firm with 2100 attorneys and a $8.1 M spent in 2018 and revenues of $1.5 B.
Hecht, Latham et al
Major lobbying entity with a $24.5 M spend in 2018. Counts Cognizant Technology Solutions as a client.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Giant IT consulting firm with a $21.7 M lobbying spend in 2018.
Hobart Hallaway & Quayle Ventures
Lobbying firm with $4.8 M spend in 2018. Obviously this firm is not concerned with pushing false information as they count the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. And yet another awful lobbyist website. ex-VP J Danforth Quayle is listed as a "strategic advisor." Pass.
Is listed as the same company as Hobart Hallaway & Quayle Ventures
Giant tech company which spent $5.36 M in lobbying in 2018.
Giant tech company which spent $5.99 M in lobbying in 2018.
Mehlman, Castagnetti et al
Major lobbying company with $14.5 M spend in lobbying in 2018. Counts Dell/VMware, DXC Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, HP, Micron Technologies, Adobe, Cloudflare, SAP, Texas Instruments, Red Hat, Applied Materials, as technology clients.
Tech company with a lobbying spend of $2.55 M in 2018.
Giant tech company which spent $13.9 M in lobbying in 2018. Microsoft also lobbies through several other entities on this list.
National Assn of Indep Colleges & Univs
This is the second university lobby group on this list. In total they spent $433,500 in 2018.
National Assn of Manufacturers
This is a large lobby group which represents manufacturing companies and spent $9.8 M in 2018. On their website it states "High skilled immigration boosts US innovation, entrepreneurship and technology change." As is normally the case, there is nothing listed about the impacts on domestic workers.
Tech giant which spent $10.1 M in 2018. Larry Ellison is personally worth $70 B. However, it is important to Oracle that they keep wages low with more Indian immigration. Interestingly most of Oracle's margin comes from the fact that it outsources support to India and takes a 90%+ margin on the support it offers customers.
Principal Financial Group
The financial services company which spent $2.7 M in lobbying in 2018.
The NJ state university that spent $270,000 on lobbying in 2018. The universities are small players in terms of lobbying.
The tech giant spent a surprisingly small amount of $2.68 M on lobbying in 2018.
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories
The utiliities management company is a tiny lobbying entity with only $80,000 in total spending in 2018.
Society for Human Resource Management
This is an interesting entry. It has one of the more obscure names. They are a professional development organization for HR professionals. Many of the bills they have supported actually seem to promote worker interests. This is only the second entry where it is not obvious which direction they lobbied. They spent $2.5 M in 2018 in total lobbying.
Squire Patton Boggs
Giant law and lobbying firm which spent $24.2 M in 2018. They specialize in lobbying on behalf of cities.
Another university on the list -- they spent $470,000 in 2018 on lobbying.
A tiny lobbying firm which appears to be a one person operation.
This is another of Microsoft's entities, but they spent only $260,000 in total in lobbying in 2018.
The tech giant spent $2.2 M in lobbying in 2018.
University of Texas/Austin
No financial information available.
US Chamber of Commerce
This is an enormous lobbying entity, with $97.7 M spent in 2018 on lobbying. A lot of what the US Chamber of Commerce lobbies for is "legal reform," this is a euphemism for making it more difficult for individuals to sue companies. The number of lobbyists the US CoC has lobbying on behalf of this bill easily outnumbers all other lobbying entities.
Williams & Jensen
A major lobbying firm with $16.2 M in spending for 2018. They count Dell among their technology clients.
The giant Indian technology company, they spend a shockingly small amount on lobbying activities, spending only $110,000. These immigration bills are most likely their primary interest. Wipro, although it operates in the US, is almost entirely Indian. Apparently the logic is that if the discrimination is performed by Indian companies against non-Indians that there should be nothing to complain about. Another argument made for Wipro is that the environment is so naturally hostile to non-Indians that no non-Indian would want to work there. Which is an interesting way around discrimination laws.
What Percentage of Entities Are Clearly Lobbying in Favor of H.R.1044?
This is 47 of 49 entities and 182 separate lobbyists working to enlarge the “skilled” worker immigration bill, a bill that requires a special interpretive robot to even understand. Of the remaining two entities, Society for Human Resource Management and Americans for Prosperity, they may have lobbied against the bill, we can’t be sure.
Let us say that both of these entities lobbied against of the bill, that would mean that 47/49 = 95% of the entities lobbied in favor of the bill. This is not an issue that elected officials are asked about. This means that this off the table issue has close to zero voter input — and the input is entirely from lobbyists, none of which represent workers and none of which have ever worked in IT. They present none of the downsides of the H1-B program, or of how US IT has been so swiftly converted to a place hostile to domestic workers.
Secondly, where is the general discussion on this bill? Where is the media coverage of the bill?
Notice a company like Cognizant. They are a factory for bringing in Indian workers to the US. And their margins on this labor are enormous.
The Centrality of H1-B to The Overall Strategy of Indian IT Consulting Firms
This is Cognizant requiring skills? That is Cognizant’s only motivation? It’s not long term control over workers and higher margins? Also, Cognizant may have a US office, but they are primarily Indian. I thought we were opposed to foreign entities meddling in US politics? Naturally, Cognizant, Wipro, TATA and Infosys would like more Indian workers under the high degree of control that is a consequence of the H1-B program, but this is because these companies are concerned for US competitiveness or because this is how they make very large margins?
What did Cognizant, Wipro, TATA or Infosys have to building up the country in the first place?
Nothing. What is their concern for the long term interests of the US. Let me say zero.
However, they will in effect “sell” the US to Indians who want to leave India. However, why is the US theirs to sell?
How actively did any of these companies look for US domestic IT workers to fill these roles?
If we look at the largest Indian IT companies their primary strategy is to undercut US-based companies like Deloitte and Accenture. To do this they need a lower cost base, and this is why they have to have large number of lower-paid and compliant H1-Bs. This is not a “partial” strategy — these Indian companies are not using the H1-B program anything like it was originally intended. It is simply a strategy that allows them to underbid competitors.
What is the Conventional IT Media’s Coverage of This H.R.1044?
Close to nothing.
Each of the major media entities counts many of the company’s lobbying on this list as customers.
This is covered in the article Why Media Turns a Blind Eye to Indian IT. Not only do IT media entities provide false information about technology and take paid placements from the IT companies, but it is also the subjects they don’t cover. And they don’t cover any issues that relate to labor. Labor does not exist to these companies, because labor does not fund these entities. The IT media entities have teams of people actively calling the big tech companies asking them if they would like to place advertisements or whether they would like to place an article in their publication. Very few publishers, such as The Register, are not in the pocket of the big tech companies.
Who Opposes the Bill?
What is curious is to find who opposes the bill. These entities are listed as opposing the bill.
Albuquerque Center for Peace and Justice
Arab American Institute
Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs (APAPA)
Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, AFL-CIO
Council on American-Islamic Relations
Federal Asian Pacific American Council (FAPAC)
Italian American Democratic Leadership Council
National Iranian American Council Action
National Korean American Service and Education Consortium (NAKASEC)
OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates
Pakistani American Political Action Committee (PAKPAC Membership)
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
United Chinese Americans
United Macedonian Diaspora
United We Dream
So basically any group that is not Indian! Notice this is exactly what was predicted in a previous quotation from Conservative Review. After the IT companies gobble up more of the H1-B visas for India, a movement will begin to make the H1-B more “equitable” which will translate into increasing the overall program.
Notice the explanation for the opposition to the bill on the NAIC Action website, which is a lobby group for Iranians.
This legislation, disingenuously named the Fairness for High Skilled Immigrants Act (H.R. 1044 & S. 386), would effectively close the path to green cards for Iranian nationals as well as for virtually every other nationality. It would add years of delay to the green card process for Iranians already subject to single-entry visas and the Muslim Ban. At a time when this administration has demonized immigrants from numerous countries, we believe that none of these ineffective, harmful policies, including H.R. 1044, occur in a vacuum. The best remedy for the green card backlog is to increase the number of green cards available, not pit groups of immigrants against each other, forcing them to fight for the meager amount of green cards currently available.
Iranian nationals and Iranian Americans are currently being attacked from all sides. Accompanying the U.S. failed maximum pressure in Iran is the maximum restrictions on Iranians and Iranian Americans in the United States–as seen through extreme vetting and the Muslim Ban.
Now Iranians know how US IT workers feel! Their workplaces have been taken over by Indians, and the corporations intend to continue importing Indian labor into the next century.
NAIC’s opposition to the bill is that it pushes down immigration from Iran. This is the most aggressive opposition to the bill that we could find. And there is nothing like this written by any group that supports domestic IT workers. Again and again, it is as if domestic IT workers have absolutely no voice in an immigration policy that has greatly changed the landscape of the work environment in the US.
Other Supporters of Increased H1-B Indian Immigration
This was a listing of the companies lobbying (nearly all) in favor of expanding Indian immigration. However, previous increases to the H1-B have included even more companies including.
American Council of Life Insurers
Entertainment Software Association
American Staffing Association
Semiconductor Industry Association
Deere & Co
American Medical Staffing Association
That is another 18 entities. 18 + 47 is 65. We are up to 65 entities that are tracked to have lobbied in support of expanding H1-B — and this is not an exhaustive list.
There are so many problems with how these bills are being passed.
Let us review some of them.
The bill itself is designed to be unintelligible. This reduces transparency if only the lobbyists who created the bill know what it does. Some of the statements in the bill are clearly designed to trick the reader. At one point it states that “for each of fiscal years 2020, 2021, and 2022, not more than 85 percent shall be allotted to immigrants who are natives of any single foreign state.” However, India has historically taken around 85% of the H1-B allotment, so why would a cap of 85% be necessary? This appears to be a fake cap.
The lobbying is highly one-sided. This amounts to those entities that want to hire H1-B workers making their case. There is virtually zero worker input as to the number of visas. This means that the overall technology visa program is being managed by profit-maximizing companies.
The entire process is not entirely secretive, but it is clearly far more secretive than it should be. There is close to no major IT media coverage of this topic.
All of the arguments are around “competitiveness” and “skills” even though it is known that companies love H1-B because they get to control the employee for up to 10 years or more, and they also pay H1-B employees significantly less. Yet, these motivations are entirely undiscussed. If these same companies to pay 30% less to domestic employees and could control them for 7 years, these companies would be singing the praises of this program, which could be called “The Domestic Indentured Servitude Program” as well.
As I previously covered in the article Discrimination by Indian Workers Against US Workers, US workers are already facing significant discrimination against them by Indian workers, and this bill is simply designed to allow companies to bring over more H1-B workers. And these ultra-wealthy companies are pushing for more Indian workers to come in and further push the balance in IT departments against domestic workers. These tech giants have massively overcompensated leaders.
Jeff Bezos, before his divorce, was worth $130 B. Larry Ellison $70 B. Bill Gates $105 B. What is the argument exactly, that these men require more wealth that should be taken from US domestic workers? If we take Larry Ellison, without the margin from support that is primarily based in India which we covered in the article How do SAP and Oracle’s Support Profit Margins Compare to Pablo Escobar?, this means that if those jobs supporting US companies had been given to US workers, Larry Ellison’s net worth would be significantly smaller. The evidence is clear that these companies will take any cost savings from bringing in more Indian workers and push it to their executives. I have shown this graph in other articles, but it illustrates clearly that productivity gains are not shared with workers unless the workers organize and make those productivity gains be shared.
This graphic explains how individuals like Larry Ellison or Bill Gates can accumulate the amount of money that they do.
According to the Economic Policy Institute..
CEO compensation has grown 940% since 1978.
Typical worker compensation has risen only 12% during that time.
Hmmm…one wonders if there might be a relationship. One wonders if CEOs and other executives might be taking almost the entirety of productivity gains and pocketing them while sharing close to zero of these gains with workers.
In fact, let us review how CEOs and other executives have reduced the sharing of the benefits of economic activity with workers. The evidence is undeniable.
Why are CEOs paid so much more in the US than they were back in the 1960s and 1970s? Also, why are US CEOs and executives paid so much compared to CEOs and executives in other countries?
How were CEOs getting motivated in the 1960s and 1970s when they were only getting 20x the pay of the average worker? This current chart is a bit out of date, and with the current stock bubble, the current ratio is in around 340x. This means that a CEO makes in one day what the average worker takes a year to make. Imagine a person going in for a day of work, and then saying they are done for the year because they made what you made going in for one year of work.
No country comes close to the pay differential between CEOs and their workers. Why?
Compensation Unrelated to Performance
Interestingly, studies into this CEO pay concludes it has little to do with CEO performance.
This is what we tested in our earlier analysis. We used a wide variety of statistical specifications, which controlled for factors like revenue growth, profit growth, and share price appreciation. In none of them did we find a statistically significant negative coefficient for the variable for CEO pay in the insurance industry in the years after the cap went into effect. In fact, in most of the specifications, this coefficient was positive, indicating that CEO pay actually rose in the insurance industry, in spite of the cap on the tax deduction.
We saw this result as being consistent with a view that pay does not reflect the CEO’s value to shareholders. In this alternative view, the explosion of CEO pay over the last four decades is primarily attributable to the corruption of the corporate governance process.
CEO pay is most immediately determined by boards of directors. The directors, who are themselves highly paid for very part-time work, largely owe their jobs to CEOs and other top management. Incumbent directors who are re-nominated by the board almost never get removed by shareholders. – Economic Policy Institute
Rather than being related to the performance of the company the CEO and other executives work for, the pay can be seen to simply reflect the natural course of the stock market.
It should also be pointed out that much of this compensation is stock.
And because of the accounting rules, this compensation is not recognized as a decrement from the balance sheet the way that salaries are. This means that while ordinary workers’ compensation directly reduces the balance sheet, much of the CEO and other executives are paid with what amounts to “dark money.” The income comes from diluting other shareholders.
This is how Safra Catz will most likely leave Oracle as a billionaire. And of course Safra Catz would think that not only her billion is entirely justified, but the H1-B program should be doubled or tripled.
For the tech sector, a constant flow of Indian workers being brought into the US, combined with constant outsourcing of jobs to India is foundational to the profit margins and executive pay at these companies.
This relationship is clearly explained in the following quotation.
Nevertheless, the normally tight relationship between overall stock prices and CEO compensation, as shown in Figure A, casts doubt on the theory that CEOs are enjoying high and rising pay because their individual productivity is increasing (e.g., because they head larger firms, have adopted new technology, or for other reasons). CEO compensation often grows strongly when the overall stock market rises and individual firms’ stock values rise along with it. This is a marketwide phenomenon, not one of improved performance of individual firms: Most CEO pay packages allow pay to rise whenever the firm’s stock value rises; that is, they permit CEOs to cash out stock options regardless of whether the rise in the firm’s stock value was exceptional relative to comparable firms in the same industry. The slight loosening of the relationship between overall stock market growth and CEO compensation growth does not alter this conclusion. – Economic Policy Institute
This means that the entire logic of “paying for performance” where CEOs and other executives would have their compensation tied to their performance is false. The executives at Oracle are a perfect example of how their personal compensation is unrelated to the performance of the company, and furthermore, how they have given enormous incentives to misrepresent the company’s prospects to investors.
While these companies like to describe their great innovation, what they leave off of the table is that what primes the pump for higher profits is labor exploitation. Jeff Bezos is well known for exploiting his warehouse worker, as well as running AWS as a white-collar sweatshop.
Thank You to OpenSecrets
Special thanks go out to OpenSecrets.org. This is a website that makes this information available that I used as the basis for this analysis. OpenSecrets.org relies on donations, and my feeling is that the US government would prefer if this website did not operate.
They would like to make it so you have to travel to Washington to look for this information in some basement. The politicians do not want anyone knowing how is contributing to which candidate and getting which legislation passed. The analysis of who donates to what bill and what candidate is more important than what any politician says. In fact, it seems that politicians could be simply rendered mute, and all voters review the lobbying activities and campaign contributions of big money donors.
IBM has a multidecade strategy of increasing profit margins on workers by replacing domestic with Indian workers.
They call this strategy a “commitment to diversity.”
Diversity is a term that sounds like it means one thing, but it used as a cover for something quite different. The usage of the term by IBM is a perfect example of how the term is used to pretend it describing something that it is not.
Ginni Rometty’s on IBM’s Commitment to Diversity
For example, when IBM CEO Ginni Rometty of IBM makes the following statement.
“IBM thinks about diversity the way we think about innovation — both are essential to the success of our business. When we innovate, technology becomes smarter for clients and creates new opportunities for growth.
When we incorporate diversity into our business, we create better innovations and outcomes. IBM has embraced diversity, and it gives opportunities for IBMers and our clients to achieve their full potential.”
IBM and Ginni can be sure that this statement goes virtually without any investigation or commentary in any IT media outlet.
This is the standard marketing presentation of IBM. However, employees at IBM tell a very different story.
This quote is from the article My father was IBM’s first black software engineer. The racism he fought persists in the high-tech world today.
IBM publicly represents itself as a company with deep roots in diversity and inclusion, but history tells a different story. The roots of racism in high tech coincide with the advent of the digital age, when in the late 1920s a fledgling company run by a cutthroat but savvy businessman named Thomas J. Watson saw an opportunity in eugenics.
Eugenics is a pseudoscience that seeks to create a “racially pure” master human race by eliminating those deemed inferior. In 1928, the Eugenics Records Office in Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y., had undertaken a project to identify mixed-race individuals on the island of Jamaica for forced sterilization and other means of population control. Realizing the massive amount of data to be collected and compiled, Watson stepped in with IBM to provide the punched-card technology crucial for the Jamaica project’s success. – Los Angles Times
IBM – A Commitment to Firing Domestic Workers from their Jobs and Replacing Them With Indians
IBM has followed a multi-decade policy of removing domestic workers from their jobs and replacing them with lower-cost Indian resources, both in home IT market countries and in India. This has partially covered up the fact that IBM is a company in steep decline. This, profit maximization, is why IBM embraces “diversity” which IBM seems to define as hiring mostly Indians from one region of India. That is to IBM Diversity = Indians and does not = domestic employees.
There is no lie that proponents of Indian labor won’t tell to maintain these profits. Unless something is done, every issue discussed in this article and the articles above, we predict will get worse.
The Easy Way
IBM has found an easier way to make money rather than innovating or bringing out interesting products. It has decided to mainly be a system implementing company, making money from the high US IT rates, and the much lower rates it pays consultants. Secondly, it brings a continuous stream of new IT consultants over from India such that several of the projects I have worked on with IBM have been 90% Indian. The few non-Indian consultants being one or two consultants, and then the team manager who is always American born. Sufficed to say, IBM could never make this same margin on US-born consultants, and so the IT practice at IBM is in process of becoming 90% Indian. This is combined with increasing amounts of outsourcing of work to the India. Wary of caution, IBM had decided to no longer report their employment numbers on a per country basis. This means that while IBM will continue to pull large sums of money from US companies, it will no longer provide a significant share of its earnings in US employment.
To say that IBM is becoming increasingly global is either sugar-coating or misunderstanding what is actually happening. IBM is in process of becoming an Indian company, much like Infosys, simply performing arbitrage between Indian labor and US and European consulting rates. The company will then provide very little US employment, but still bill at the same rates as before. This will lead to greater payouts for the management of IBM and eventually, the income inequality within IBM will come to approximate that of India itself. This is the bold new future direction for IBM, an outsourced firm where the work is done by people that can be very easily controlled and paid quite a bit less than IBM’s previous workforce. The moral within IBM is horrendous currently, and the easy money of labor arbitrage is like heroin to IBM.
IBM is committed to enormous profit margins, and this means firing domestic workers and hiring Indian workers both in India and in domestic home IT markets. IBM hides its employment in different countries to prevent anyone from seeing this. IBM likes to sugar coat this strategy by calling it a commitment to diversity.
IBM’s model is a problem because it does not delivery very much value to clients. Firstly, their advice is very generic and similar to Deloitte or Accenture simply designed to extend the stay of their consultants on projects. The robotic and undifferentiated nature of large company consulting characteristics is described in this article. Secondly, it undermines US employment and passes any cost saving from a lower-cost labor force to the partners and executives at IBM while the client pays the same price they paid previously.
A primary reason for this is that virtually all IT media entities rely on industry as their single source of income. Therefore most of the IT media sources serve as a PR/marketing function for the IT companies, and this means that anything that increases revenues and margins will be covered (new product introductions, the rise of popular IT trends) while anything that exposes unfair labor practices against workers will have close to zero coverage. To flourish as an IT media entity one must get advertising dollars and paid placements or email addresses (in the case of TechTarget, which only exits to collect and share e-mail addresses).
IT media entities compete with each other for these industry sourced dollars and people are promoted or demoted on the basis of how well they cater to industry income sources. In IT media there is no dedication to the readers, as readers (after demonetization of media brought by the Internet) do not pay for content.
For companies that want to get their story out, each media entity has a dollar figure attached. Gartner is the leader because they can charge the most for access to their readers. In fact, Gartner can punish companies that don’t pay them by excluding them from various ratings.
IT Companies Prefer This Issue to Stay As Quiet as Possible
IT companies do not want the topics in this article discussed or covered because the use of Indian labor is a primary component to their strategy to lower wages and correspondingly increase margins in inbound countries. The current situation, which is highly negative for domestic workers, is presented in the IT media as an entirely positive development.
IT media are large companies that reflect the interests very narrowly of their funders. None of these media entities are run by workers or have the concerns of workers at heart because they receive no income from workers.
IT media sources serve as a PR/marketing function for the IT companies, and this means that anything that increases revenues and margins will be covered. When vendors interact with IT media entities, they basically say the following.
“Impress us, show us that our spend with you is driving our revenues and lead generation.”
And of course, the media entities do what they can to bend over backward to show them why they should spend more with them.
IDG owns 8 of the top 20 IT media brands.
This is the page that readers of IDG IT websites don’t see, it is directed towards advertizers and those that want to publish paid placements. Notice the quotation.
“IDG organizes our content, demand generation, and ad serving so that we can segment audiences deeper an anyone else. Our customers know they can rely on IDG to deliver the right buyer at scale exactly when they are most receptive to a marketer’s message…”
That is journalism?
Producing rigged content designed to get the “audience” to buy. IDG is willing to republish anything vendors or consulting companies say, and the other IT media entities work the exact same way. You can even choose the media “brand” you would like your false information published. It is really customer focused!
It should be noted that there is no overlap between what the IT media entities do and journalism. Journalism only arose under a condition where the reader in some way compensates the publisher for the content they consume. In every situation, when the publisher receives their income from companies exclusively, the content devolves into propaganda. This is a problem in media that cuts across the different media categories as publishing have been demonetized by the Internet and by companies like Google that take the advertising dollars for themselves choking off revenues from content creators.
The IT media entities don’t “report” they are conduits through which opinion can be shaped and controlled. For example, when IBM CEO Ginni Rometty of IBM makes the following statement.
“IBM thinks about diversity the way we think about innovation — both are essential to the success of our business. When we innovate, technology becomes smarter for clients and creates new opportunities for growth.
When we incorporate diversity into our business, we create better innovations and outcomes. IBM has embraced diversity, and it gives opportunities for IBMers and our clients to achieve their full potential.”
IBM and Ginni can be sure that this statement goes virtually without any investigation or commentary in any IT media outlet.
IBM – A Commitment to Firing Domestic Workers from their Jobs and Replacing Them With Indians
IBM has followed a multi-decade policy of removing domestic workers from their jobs and replacing them with lower-cost Indian resources, both in home IT market countries and in India. This has partially covered up the fact that IBM is a company in steep decline. This, profit maximization, is why IBM embraces “diversity” which IBM seems to define as hiring mostly Indians from one region of India. That is to IBM Diversity = Indians and does not = domestic employees.
How the Domestic Media System is Paid to Promote Indian Immigration into IT Jobs
This is entirely obvious, yet no major IT media entity would ever write this. How could you go back and ask for money from IBM after critiquing IBM? This author was once quoted in TechTarget. Immediately a vendor reached out to TechTarget and told them I was not on the approved list of analysts to speak to. This powerful vendor has an official list that it dictates that media entities may speak to, and of course those they may not.
There is no lie that proponents of Indian labor won’t tell to maintain these profits. Unless something is done, every issue discussed in this article and the articles above, we predict will get worse.
CNN’s View on H1-B
CNN represents the interests of big companies in the US to US viewers. Notice how CNN presents this issue.
Silicon Valley giants like Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOGL) and Facebook (FB) also make use of H-1B visas. Eric Schmidt, the formerexecutive chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, has previously called the annual limit of 85,000 H-1B visas “the single stupidest policy in the entire American political system.”
“We have emphasized, time and again … the contribution of Indian skilled professionals to the growth and development of the US economy,” said Kumar, the Indian government spokesperson.
A trade group representing India’s outsourcing industry said on Thursday that cutting down on H-1B visas would ultimately hurt America’s global leadership in technology by reducing its ability to attract the most talented workers from around the world. – CNN
The only person seeking to restrict H1-B visas is Trump. CNN only relies upon sources from the Indian government that seek to maximize the number of H1-B visas, and then companies like Google’s Eric Schmidt. Notice that not a single representative of US workers, or even a US IT workers is asked their view on the topic. Google’s profit margins on H1-B workers is not mentioned, neither are the entities that support the trade group that represent India’s outsourcing industry. India’s outsourcing industry pulls jobs out of the US and this leads to workers in the US getting pink slips and the jobs being moved to India. Is this group really interested in America’s global leadership technology, or are they only seeking to maximize the profits for the outsourcing companies that they represent?
Notice the following quote.
“If US policy makes it more difficult to hire advanced tech workers, it will only weaken the US companies that depend on them to help fill their skills gaps, put jobs at risk, creating pressure to send technology services abroad,” the National Association of Software and Services Companies said in a statement. – CNN
Once again, this weakens US companies. Nothing is stated about the workers. US workers already have to work in IT departments that are often 1/2 Indian and face Indian discrimination — however, the giant tech companies need even more people from India. Nothing is stated about why these ultra-wealthy tech companies can’t obtain these workers from the pool or US citizens.
Not one time in the CNN article does CNN evaluate the accuracy of any of the statements made by the sources that are quoted in their article.
IT media does not cover the negative impacts of extensive Indian take over of the IT sector nor the large scale discrimination on the part of Indians against non-Indians because IT companies like the margins of Indian labor and don’t want anyone to upset their apple cart of profitability.
IT media companies consider themselves to serve no public function, as they receive no income from readers they do not follow any journalistic standards and have no responsibility to cover anything but that which allows them to obtain more income from the IT companies.
A major reason why US domestic workers will not fight back against abusive H1-B practices is the fear of being called racist.
This article will describe this scenario and why the charge is unfounded.
A primary inhibiting meme for standing up to the Indian takeover of IT, to the H1-B abuses, to corporations using the H1-B program to replace domestic workers at lower rates, to Indians who target US domestic workers to be removed so they can be replaced by other Indians they know, is being called racist.
The United States is an interesting country. The previous generations that lived in an built the US, beat both the Japanese and the Nazis in WW2, put a man on the moon, developed one of the best and largest national road systems and a large middle class.
The current inhabitants, however, burst into tears if a person even begins to use the “R-word,” much less calls them a racist. Under the current concept, there is only response to being accused of racism — acquiescence.
If another party uses the R-word, this means that the entire argument must be ceded to the person who used the term.
There is no response to the R-word, the recipient of the word is required to sit in a corner for several hours, and then later to repent in some type of public forum.
How Racism Works in India
India never rose to the level of discrimination of racism — India is several hundred years prior in its development to discriminating on the basis of race. Indians discriminate on the basis of tribe and caste distinctions.
This video shows the caste in India system.
This video explains how the caste system on partially based upon the lack of a social security system in India.
Bringing Indian Modalities to the US
The way Indians function in the US and Europe and Australia is basically how they function in India. India is a place with extremely limited resources, and there are basically countless divisions, and it is expected that you support your family or your tribal affiliation. For people that grew up in developed countries, it is a very foreign concept. That is the Indians don’t function as individuals, they function as a group to block out other groups. This is why the more Indians that come over the bigger the problem will be.
Many IT workers are well paid, if they were smart they would support an organization to curtail the H1-B program. If I were to develop a strategy it would be to publish on the program’s real outcomes. I do a lot of work on IT media analysis. And my conclusion is that all the IT media entities do is refect the interests of the funding entities — which is big vendors, consulting firms, etc. So they don’t cover the reality of what is happening.
The MoveOn.org Petition
I offered this petition to one IT worker I discussed this topic with.
The response to this was interesting.
I don’t have any problem with US companies hiring Indian programmers, architects, etc.
I HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM WITH THE INDIAN CONSULTING COMPANIES/RECRUITERS.
I have no idea – at all – about how to stop the tsunami of Indian recruiters. That is what I’d like to stop.
Re: the Move On petition – there is no way in Hell I’d sign that thing – it smacks of racism and I would never
ask our “President” to stop foreign workers from coming here.
MoveOn.org as Racist?
Looking at this petition, it is difficult to see where the racism is. In fact, it calls out many important technical details of the H1-B program and nowhere is race even discussed. Furthermore, MoveOn.rog is actually a democratic sided grassroots organization. See this link.
This proposes that a street close to a Trump tower be named Barack Obama Avenue. MoveOn.org is filled with people who would probably commit suicide if they found out someone thought they were racist.
Accusations of racism stop what is pressing legitimate points against the H1-B program. In order to fight for jobs for US domestic workers, and to fight against the abuses of the H1-B program, it is necessary to break from this concern of being criticized.
SAP has essentially announced they practice age discrimination.
How a major media outlet incorrectly covered SAP and served to support their spin.
This article covers how a cover story created by SAP (and other tech companies) is being used to engage in age discrimination. The article will provide evidence that the reason for this discrimination is like other employment initiatives in tech companies, too reduce labor costs.
Age Discrimination 2.0: Hiring Those Millenials and Younger
It has become quite common to emphasize hiring Millenials, and younger. SAP has a program called SAP Young Professionals Program targeted towards hiring youth.
The SAP Young Professionals program was launched by the SAP Training and Development Institute in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA), a region with a high level of youth unemployment, where it can be very difficult for young people to find suitable work despite having excellent educational credentials. The program now runs in 22 countries across the globe, with 2,132 graduates to date. The SAP certifications that the graduates attain are suited to the demand in the local markets for SAP-related skills. Graduates of the program almost always stay within the SAP ecosystem, where they have a competitive edge with their certifications and training on the latest SAP innovations. – SAP
Something that SAP does not mention, is that you can bet that SAP got this employee cheap! And this is a big part of the youth movements (and corresponding age discrimination) in tech companies.
Interestingly, I could not find a single program focused on hiring older employees.
In an article published by Bloomberg that reads like it was paid for by SAP, SAP again makes their interest in hiring younger employees apparent.
Instead, Plattner, 75, wants to shake up SAP once more and make it the employer of choice for the young and hungry. And with just a few years until he hits self-imposed retirement, Plattner is showing no sign of slow-walking the rejuvenation in his quest to protect a legacy of disruptive software mogul.
Surprisingly, there is actually some pushback quoted in the article.
The Union Voice on SAP from Germany
Labor representatives are complaining that SAP is trying to squeeze out expensive, older employees who helped drive SAP’s early success. “Hiring more young people is good and right,” said Eberhard Schick, a member of SAP‘s workers’ council, who joined the company in 1997. “But you shouldn’t forget about the seasoned employees — they deserve a career perspective and training opportunities.”
Interestingly, there is a labor representative in Germany. If this were the US, this quote would not exist, because there is no labor representative for SAP in the US. Most Americans that work in IT don’t have any idea what the history of labor and labor versus corporations actually is. Unions, not corporations fought for a 40-hour work week (corporations opposed it). Unions, not corporations fought against child factory labor (again corporation supported child labor). Child labor is still a huge problem internationally. It is only not much less of a problem in the US, Canada, Western Europe, Australia/NZ because corporations were fought against to make the practice illegal.
*While researching this article I was shocked to find that child labor has crept back into the US through migrant farm labor.
But child labor doesn’t happen only abroad. In the United States, labor laws allow children to work in agriculture at much younger ages, for longer hours, and under more hazardous conditions than children in other industries. This means that a 12-year old can work 50 or 60 hours a week in fields, exposed to toxic pesticides and extreme heat, and it’s legal. – Human Rights Watch
The US prefers if employees have no voice, with only 12% of the population belonging to a union.
There is a direct relationship between the unionization in society and the income equality in that society. In the US, executives have taken the money that would have gone to workers if the unionization were higher, and have paid much of it out in executive compensation. For those that think unions lead to communism, the US was a capitalist society back in 1960, at the heights of unions. And it was a far more equal and more sustainable society. Furthermore, nearly every national health statistics (health care outcomes, % of people in prison, infant mortality rates, etc.. was better in 1960 than it is today.Wealthy executives prefer that people focus on education rather than on unions.
Why is this?
Because unions are effective in raising wages overall, while education is not.
In the US, wages stopped growing in roughly 1970, even though productivity continued a rapid increase. Why? Each year the population became more educated. However, education could not counteract the effect of the decline in unionization, greatly reducing the bargaining power of workers. If the US had the same education level as in 1970 (far lower) but had maintained its unions, it appears that as wages were tracking productivity up until 1970, US wages could be twice what they are now. Instead, all of that productivity was placed into the pockets of the wealthy. Major financial interests do not want this graphic seen or understood — which is why they focus on ancillary issues as we cover in the article Why the Gender Pay Gap is Discussed But Not Overall Pay.
Returning to the quote from the labor representative from Germany, Bloomberg had no comment and simply moved on to the next topic.
Plattner’s alma mater, IBM, demonstrates that change is arguably less painful than failure to act. IBM faces several lawsuits accusing it of firing older workers, with one former vice president putting the number of employees let go in the last few years at 100,000, a figure that IBM disputes.
It is a company that is constantly shedding its domestic employees to hire in India and has a horrible internal culture. The message boards around IBM illustrate great anger from former employees and disgust at what IBM has become. IBM, once one a truly innovative company is now just a fleecing operation that pretends it can do things it can’t do. IBM has been shedding experience employees for at least two decades, but how has this improved IBM? If anything, this is at least partial evidence to not do this, rather than evidence that it should be done. The entire paragraph quote from Bloomberg above is illogical. The only evidence presented by the Bloomberg author that IBM has benefited from shedding more experienced workers is that they have received lawsuits for age discrimination. Is that a good thing? Is that a reason to do something, because you get sued for doing it?
Secondly, how many employees has IBM let go in the past few years? If IBM disputes the 100,000 figure, then they should provide the figure they have let go. Years ago, IBM stopped reporting its number of employees per country for the precise reason that they could hide how much they are now increasingly a company based in India.
SAP’s Moving to the Cloud and Needs Different (Read: Younger) Employees?
The hard choices facing SAP are emblematic of the industry’s shift toward selling products in the cloud, which allows companies to implement new software faster and cheaper than products that need to be installed at a customer’s own data center. It’s a move that will require fewer people, and with different skill sets than many of those now at SAP.
The idea that SAP is moving to the cloud is simply false. SAP is actually moving to simply mark up the cloud services of other cloud providers as we covered in the article How to Understand SAP’s Upcharge as a Service Cloud, and massively up charging the customer for “going through SAP.” Therefore, the rest of the paragraph is also false. SAP is not moving to younger employees because their delivery mechanism is changing. SAP has an 85% margin on its support, and in fact, most of the margins are in support as covered in the article The Giant Margins for SAP and Oracle Support, and SAP has outsourced most of its support staff to India, precisely to obtain these margins. The fact is that SAP’s margins have virtually nothing to do with the cloud discussions, it is the overseas workers that allow SAP to have the margins that it does.
Notice that there is none of this analysis in the article. The Bloomberg author simply repeats whatever SAP tells him. This perpetuates several falsehoods:
a.) that SAP gets significant revenue from the cloud it operates (untrue as it marks up other cloud service providers) and…
b.) that it is warranted in shedding older workers because it needs to improve its margin to what it was in the 2011 time period.
“Transitions like these cause disruption and take time,’’ said Anurag Rana, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. “But SAP has a portfolio of good products that should help the company stay relevant in the long term.”
Has Anurag every used an SAP product? If so, he would know this statement is not true. SAP has a very well known ERP system, but the system is quite aged at this point and SAP’s new S/4HANA application follow on to ECC is a regression in many ways. Secondly, companies that purchased ECC faced enormous costs and often ended up purchasing other SAP products like APO, BW, PLM, SRM, that is products that are truly horrible. But again, Anurag works for Bloomberg, and so he has a specific script he needs to read if he intends to keep working there. Most IT analysts have never touched an SAP application in their lives, but this does not stop them from making highly confident statements about these topics.
Age Discrimination as Necessary Because of German Eating Non-Innovative Pretzel Eaters?
Hasso makes a curious observation about German culture.
German complacency has long been one of Plattner’s pet peeves. As far back as 2006, Plattner vented his anger by lamenting how Germans lack the drive to be successful and risk being eclipsed by more innovative countries including the U.S., India and China. “We’re happy sitting in front of a television, munching on pretzels,” Plattner said at the time. “Some things in this country are beyond fossil.”
Eating pretzels and watching televisions has not seemed to limit Germany’s ability to be innovative and historically innovative in areas ranging from chemicals to automobiles to specialty manufacturing. I wonder if Hasso thinks innovation only occurs in software. If we measure Germany’s innovation in software, it is weak — but this is primarily because of SAP’s lack of innovation, as outside of SAP Germany’s software industry is small, so SAP is the cause of the innovation problem in the German software industry.
This is expressed also by Ahmed Azmi.
Just because SAP is lacking innovation does not mean Germany is the same. Germany has been leading the world in so many fields for so long. The fact is that Germany is trailing in software BECAUSE of SAP.
The Logical and Profit Basis in Age Discrimination
Ageism has an entirely logical basis. Companies are looking for passive employees who will go along with whatever the company wants. Older employees are less likely to go with the program. As companies in the US have become more hierarchical, and the compensation paid by US companies to executives has greatly exceeded the compensation paid to workers, there is less of interest on the part of companies to accept any critical thinking on the part of employees.
Looking past what amounts to a bunch of false information, it is quite apparent where the money that is wrung out of employees goes. This money is shifted upwards.
In past days I thought that ageism, at least in technology, was primarily based upon skills. That is generally the presentation by companies, and I was influenced by this presentation. However, I have since learned to question anything proposed by billionaires as it typically is entirely backward engineered for what makes them the most money.
Seeing how companies function, it is clearly about finding people who will tow the line. It’s actually disturbing how much work is done by the under 30 set in companies. They are super motivated, but it is also inefficient, because younger people make a lot of errors, and it is difficult to know what is true at that age. It took me a lot of time to develop certain skills, and I did not have them when I was 30. I was a lot easier to trick at 30 — I have been a skeptic most my life, I keep figuring out new things all the time (as I quickly approach 50 this September). There are pathways I would have followed just five years ago, that I would never follow now.
There is another bias in that more senior positions are often really just sales positions. SAP has a ton of VPs, and most of these VPs are just doing sales or engaging in some type of Game of Thrones political intrigue. And if you don’t want to do sales, most of the senior positions are not available. You can work on the basis of your skills when you are younger, but as a person ages, it becomes more about being a political animal. You can’t be simply a technical problem solver — that is there are a few positions for this, but most have a political component.
Unsurprisingly, companies do not discuss the logic for hiring passive and servile workers, even though this is clearly at least part of the motivation for hiring not only younger workers, but also workers that lack citizenship, such as the enormously abused H1-B program. Again, there is not a single company that will discuss their motivation for hiring H1-B workers are based upon lowering wages, even though it is firmly established that H1-B workers not only work for lower wages, but they also lower the wages of the US domestic IT workers. Here again, the media is complicit in expressing every single H1-B visa holder as “highly skilled” even though most H1-B visa holders do not meet the description. Most are moderately skilled, not highly skilled. The Indian media, much like the US media is continually referring to H1-B visa holders as highly skilled without any thinking or debate on the topic.
The Bait and Switch in Later Career Employment
There is a highly dishonest aspect to shedding older or more seasoned workers. A primary reason that younger workers make an effort to get ahead and to get skills is that they believe they will be able to have a long career from doing so. However, by shedding them as they become more expensive and less compliant, this creates a bait and switch on the young employees. That is companies that shed these workers once they reach their “used by date” don’t deserve the motivation of the younger workers they are hiring the first place. For this reason, it should be better publicized that these firms view their employees as disposable parts, to be discarded long before their effectiveness begins to wane. And as unionization has declined so much in the US, companies can get away with just borrowing workers, and discarding them, and they can count on media entities — owned by other billionaires to talk up how this supports “real innovation.”
And for younger workers who are hired because of age discrimination, they should remember something, people have a tendency to age.
Age discrimination is popular in IT because IT companies believe that it is profit-maximizing.
Age discrimination replaces workers who will be far more likely to question authority and how have the experience to contradict the false information provided to them by the company with those that lack the experience to do so. The graphics presented in this article clearly demonstrate that companies have little interest in increasing the standards of living for workers and are on a constant quest to bring in non-citizen workers, shed older workers, and shed workers in the developed world and exchange them for workers the undeveloped world (while still having access to the same customers in the developed world). In order for this to be effective, companies need complicit media entities, which nearly all major media outlets are. This prevents these questions from being asked and allows their propaganda to be repeated through their coverage. IT media not only does not discuss what is actually occurring the serve as a megaphone for the exact programs that help reduce wages for workers.
The major media entities don’t even have to be convinced by enormous companies like SAP to repeat false information to their readers. Those that own major media outlets are themselves elite entities. Bloomberg is owned by Michael Bloomberg, who has a net worth of $55 billion, making him the 6th most wealthy person in the US. Hasso Plattner is worth $14 billion. They already agree on hiding the information about how companies manipulate labor even if they have never met in person. By the time Trump leaves office, the US will have unprecedented levels of media consolidation as his FCC is repealing the restrictions on vertical integration in media.
The 2016 US Democratic Primary which pitted Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders was rigged by both the DNC and by the opinion-shaping media. This is happening again as the 2020 race heats up. Why? The media is owned by billionaires who will lose if Bernie Sanders is elected. Therefore, they use their control over media in the political sphere the same way they use their control over media in the business sphere — to present only what they want to be true, and what they want to be discussed and the options they want to be selected. In fact, this topic was barely covered in the DNC friendly networks (CNN, MSNBC) and could primarily be found on the opposition network (Fox News) and RT (funded by Russia), and this video is by Tulsi Gabbart, who stepped down from the DNC in opposition to this rigging.
This is the outcome of media consolidation.
There is no difference between the US media that covers politics and the US media that covers IT and business, it is controlled by the same entities and reflects the same elite opinion.
The Overal Trend
This article has focused on SAP, but this is only because Brightwork focuses on SAP and we easily happened to find sources and articles for SAP. In reality, Oracle, Deloitte and many other companies in IT are doing the same thing as SAP. This is an industry-wide movement to help these companies decrease their cost of labor, and to produce a cover story to distract from what they are actually doing and the reasons they are doing it.
When assessing media ownership and consolidation in both the United Kingdom and United States, it becomes clear that while there are hundreds of different publications and broadcasters, there is only an illusion of choice, and that freedom from government control and the competitive nature of the free market have failed to truly allow diverse media content and regulate media conglomerates, who now possess an extraordinary amount of power and influence. In the United Kingdom, 70% of national newspaper circulation is controlled by three different companies, leading the Media Reform Coalition (2014: 1) to claim that concentration has “reached endemic levels and is undermining the quality and diversity of output on which citizens rely.” Meanwhile, in the United States, just six companies control 90% of the media: a stark difference from 1983, when fifty companies controlled 90% of the media (Lutz 2012).
The Curran et al. (2009) study found that Americans were less informed about hard news than countries such as Denmark and Finland, where public sector broadcasters had a larger share of the audience.
Moreover, it found that public service models “minimize the knowledge gap between the advantage and disadvantaged” in comparison with an American-style private ownership model, and therefore “contributes to a more egalitarian pattern of citizenship”
While one cannot establish causation, it is possible that one of the factors that has contributed to low voter turnout in the United States and high voter turnout in Denmark is the differing media coverage of hard news in the private and public led media spheres. This insinuates that private media ownership has a negative impact on media content overall, as the content is increasingly failing to fulfil its function of promoting informed citizenship and democratising information to the public at large.
A further criticism of the privately owned media models is that they are often beholden to big business, due to their reliance on advertising to maintain a profitable venture (Herman and Chomsky 1998). The implications this has for media content stems from the “corresponding influence of advertising values on the news production processes” (Mullen and Klaehn 2010: 218), namely, a conflict of interest could easily arise due to potential discrepancies committed by advertisers. It is entirely plausible that the private media’s reliance on advertising could mean that negative content about the advertisers are omitted from public debate, and that “the probability of an event/issue becoming news is: inversely proportional to harm the information might cause investors or sponsors” (McManus 1995, cited in Rolland 2006: 942). This theory is supported by a scandal that rocked The Telegraph newspaper after it was alleged by a former employee (who resigned over the issue) that The Telegraph contrived to omit damaging reports about HSBC’s banking practices out of fear of losing out on lucrative advertising deals. According to Peter Oborne (2015), “you needed a microscope to find the Telegraph coverage” of reports that HSBC had been participants in a global tax evasion scheme — an issue that was perceived by most other national broadcasters and newspapers as hugely important. Therefore, this illustrates that the reliance of private media outlets on advertising revenue can have a damaging impact on media content through omission of stories that are clearly in the public interest.
Bonded labor is illegal in the US. However, Indian companies are engaging in bonded practices.
What this means for labor practices in IT in the primary IT markets.
There have been shocking things happening in the area of human bondage which is entirely due to Indian labor practices being exported to the US by Indian companies. We will begin this article discussing IT recruiters, move onto H1-B Visas, and then discuss labor bondage.
Indian Conformity the US Law and the Laws of the Countries of the Primary IT Markets
We began to notice unconscionable contracts from Indian IT recruiters several years ago. These contracts were like nothing we had ever seen and when the questioned these contracts we were told by the recruiters that they had many subcontractors working underneath them.
“Softech is a case in point. Owned by Krishnan Kumar, Softech has filed 32 lawsuits against employees in Gwinnett County, Georgia. Many of those lawsuits name workers who complain that they quit because they weren’t being paid. Yet most of the workers ended up on the losing end, through settlements or mediations or in court.
Kumar declined to be interviewed. But in court testimony and legal filings, he says he sues former workers to recoup the financial damage their departures cause his company – damage he routinely values at $20,000.
Virginia attorney Rajiv Khanna, who represents employers and employees in immigration matters, considers the financial shackles “an immoral, unethical and very probably illegal control of the workforce.””
And in this quotation.
“Of nearly 200 H-1B labor violation investigations completed by the Labor Department in the 2013 fiscal year, seven companies were cited for imposing – or attempting to impose – illegal penalties on workers who quit
In at least three of these cases, CompSys made workers headed to the US sign bonding agreements requiring them to pay hefty fees if they quit. They had to sign another document once they arrived, agreeing to pay $15,000 more if they quit before the end of their contracts.
“It is an artificial handcuff on workers,” said Paul Weiss, a labor attorney in New York who represented workers in some of the CompSys cases. “To impose such a draconian requirement is unconscionable.””
We found very similar types of if not illegal, completely inappropriate clauses in the contracts of Indian recruiters. When we explained the deep problems with the contract, the Indian recruiting firm both attempted to get us to speak on the phone (we think to remove the paper trail) and then proceeded to lie to us about the contract.
And the largest firms are also implicated, like TATA consulting, as the following quotation attests.
“Binding workers to their jobs in various financial ways is not limited to small-time labor brokers such as Softech, which had 81 petitions for H-1B workers approved between the 2011 and 2013 fiscal years.
Global giants such as Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, part of India’s Tata group, also have made workers sign restrictive employment agreements before they leave India for the US, according to interviews with several workers and company documents submitted in court.
With more than 16,000 H-1B petitions approved between the 2011 and 2013 fiscal years, Tata has been one of the top users of the temporary visas, according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services records. Tata clients have ranged from tech giants such as Cisco Systems to retail firms such as Walmart.
In interviews, workers said Tata demanded that they pay penalties if they quit before their contracts ended.
A native of Haryana, a northern state outside New Delhi, Kaushik started working for Tata at age 24 in India. Five years later, in 2012, the company transferred him to South Florida. Just before his departure, Kaushik said Tata required him to sign a contract promising not to quit his US job.
Over the next two years, Kaushik says Tata contracted him out to work 14-hour days without overtime pay as a computer programmer for Carnival Cruise Lines in South Florida. He was paid $60,000 a year, even though programmers in the Miami area then earned a median annual salary of $98,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“I worked from 9am to 11pm almost every night and never got paid overtime,” Kaushik said. “I thought, ‘Why am I working with this company?’
After Kaushik gave the company a week’s notice in early January, a Tata human resources representative declined to provide him with proof he had worked for the company – essential for maintaining his visa status in the United States – according to Tata emails Kaushik shared with CIR. The company also stonewalled him when he asked for the $7,000 he and the company had contributed to his retirement fund, Kaushik said.”” – The Guardian
TATA’s Defense: Contracts That are Originally Signed in India but for the US Market are not Subject to US Law
And TATA is using the defense that since the contracts are signed in India, (where pretty much anything goes) the US courts do not have jurisdiction, even though most of the life of the contract is carried out in the US!
“Yet in 1997, a state appeals court panel in San Jose sided with Tata’s lawyers, who had argued that the contracts were beyond the court’s jurisdiction because they were signed in India.”
Understanding the History of Bonded Labor
Apple publishes the following rules for suppliers.
“For example, Apple’s supplier code of conduct says companies that provide services to Apple “shall not traffic persons or use any form of slave, forced, bonded, indentured or prison labor”. The company reports that last year, it conducted 27 audits into allegations of bonded labor at its suppliers, most of them offshore.” – The Guardian
Notice the terms “bonded” with “indentured” in the description.
It is important to understand that those that bond labor have historically attempted to keep the bonded laborer from paying off the bond. This is explained in the following quotation.
“For instance, a laborer may begin with an initial debt of $200. While working and unable to leave, this worker needs a shelter, food and water. The employer tacks on $25 per day to the debt to cover those expenses. Consequently, the employee only grows his debt while continuing to labor for his debtor, and repayment is impossible.
Oftentimes this debt is passed down from generation to generation, making it eerily similar to chattel slavery in the 18th and 19th centuries. Migrant laborers are particularly vulnerable to this form of enslavement. In their home countries, migrant laborers contract with labor agencies and employers for a destination country, looking for an economic opportunity. These situations are ripe for exploitation because agencies and employers hold a debt or a bond over these employees.
Still, this particular system of slavery is deeply entrenched around the world. It’s most common in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal. In fact, the majority of the world’s slaves live and work in India in a form of bonded labor.” – End Slavery Now
Bonded labor was engaged in in the post Civil War period in the US when African Americans supposedly received their “freedom” and after the Emancipation Proclamation. This tends to not be taught in high school or college courses on history in the US, and the teaching of this history can sometimes get the presenter of the information as classified as “anti-American.”
“Following the Civil War, former slaveholders and white Americans needed labor for their workforce, so they found new ways to force African Americans to work. Whites arrested and charged African Americans and then fined them for their various crimes. Former slaves had little money to afford such fines, so white businessmen forced the emancipated slaves to take on debts in exchange for paying them. These former slaves then had a bond over them, and employers exploited the situation so that the debt could never be repaid.” – End Slavery Now
After the Northern influence left the US South, what is referred to as “slavery by another name” increased. And the system converted to bonded labor rather than slavery. Bonded labor sounds much cleaner than slavery.
This is a powerful animation. It describes a world which bonded labors live currently globally. This a very difficult video to watch.
Apple’s Constant Opportunities for Coerced Labor
The term bondage or human bondage is the same as debt peonage and is often used in conjunction with the term slavery. It is interesting that Apple has this comment in their contracts because Apple is well known to profit from what amounts to sweatshop conditions in its contract manufacturers. Apple does not need to personally exploit any worker.
In China, there are contract manufacturers lined up to offer Apple coerced labor.
In India (and in Indian companies in the US) there are firms lined up to offer Apple bonded labor.
In the US there are a large number of US workers in PR willing to tell any lie to defend anything Apple does.
International Trade: Good for Increasing the Diffusion of Coerced Labor?
Previously it was extremely uncommon to hear about coerced labor in the modern era in the developed world. However international interactions have changed all of that. All of those practices that the developed world congratulated themselves for moving past are now creeping back in.
The dirty little secret is that not everyone is so opposed to labor coercion. It might not be something that one advertises on their dating profile, but it is irrefutable that many people in many countries are actually quite amenable to slavery and coercion, as long as either they or their family members are not the coerced individuals.
There are those that say that exploiting labor is always a negative. But that can be a shortsighted view. One must consider how that money from exploiting labor is spent, and much is spent in boutiques of great status and that allow one to demonstrate one’s class and style. Therefore perhaps one should be careful to not judge labor exploitation too harshly.
International interactions were supposed to lead to some type of more flexible and open capitalism, but the interactions with the less developed world are constantly bringing coerced labor and bonded labor into the companies that operated in the developed world.
Apple has hundreds of billions of dollars in offshore accounts untaxed, and it can take its choice of entities, primarily from the undeveloped world offering them bonded labor, which can allow Apple to squirrel away even more money. What a fantastic system! Apple can succeed in both barely paying taxes, and having an army of coerced laborers working for it.
This is one of the best books written on the history of slavery and notice the title Inhuman Bondage.
It means that a person works under a bond and that they are not free until they have paid the bond. Human bondage is strongly related to human trafficking. Often people are moved to locations where they are unfamiliar and made to work off the bond.
Time to Reduce Onerous Regulations on Bonded Labor to Accommodate Indian Companies?
This is “bonded” labor, and while bonded labor was made illegal in the primary IT markets, but it still very common in India to this day. The Indian influence in the IT labor markets has brought the practice back to shores where it had been eradicated. This goes back to the repeating pattern we have observed of Indians bringing labor practices from Indian to their new countries. And the people they are putting into bondage are not the domestic population, but other Indians. The fact is that bondage labor is accepted as a practice in India. Therefore, it seems perfectly natural to extend the practice to the primary IT markets, even if it happens to be illegal in those countries.
Entities Trying to Stop International Bonded Labor (i.e..Not Apple, WiPro or Infosys)
The website Anti-Slavery.com covers this topic of human bondage in great detail.
“Debt bondage occurs when a person is forced to work to pay off a debt. They are tricked into working for little or no pay, with no control over their debt.
Most or all of the money they earn goes to pay off their loan. The value of their work invariably becomes greater than the original sum of money borrowed.
Puspal managed to leave thanks to the great support her family received from our project partners, but usually that it is extremely difficult. People bonded by debt face coercion, violence and intimidation if they try to leave.
Bonded labour has existed for hundreds of years. Debt bondage was used to trap indentured labourers into working on plantations in Africa, the Caribbean and South-East Asia, following the abolition of the Transatlantic Slave Trade.
Bonded labour is most widespread in South Asian countries such as India and Pakistan. Often entire families have to work to pay off the debt taken by one of its members. Sometimes, the debt can be passed down the generations and children can be held in debt bondage because of a loan their parents had taken decades ago.
Bonded labour flourishes because of poverty and widespread caste-based discrimination. Limited access to justice, education and jobs for discriminated groups makes it difficult to get out of poverty.”
The Importance of Silence on the Topic of Indian Bonded Labor
India is the 12th most income unequal country in the world, and bonded labor has been highly effective in keeping India at that level of inequality. It is normally felt by many in India that it is better to not discuss bonded labor as keeping it quiet is both better for national pride and can help motivate no change in this area.
Indian Respect for Freedom of Speech and of the Press
India has historically never had any freedom of speech or of the press. This is how India has remained as the twelfth most income unequal country in the world. This inequality is why India is such a hotbed for bonded labor. To maintain this level of income inequality, suppression of freedom of speech is necessary. And most Indians will oppose this article. Opposing even the right for it to be written. Again freedom of speech is part of US law, not Indian law, and the established preference is for Indian law…..but not in India, in the US. India cannot change internally because India has very low freedom of the press. According to Reporters without Borders, India ranks 138 out of 180 countries in press freedom. Articles written in the Indian press have a distinct stamp of being censored or self-censored, and there is no India media outlet that is prominent or read outside of Indian readers.
Indian IT companies are not only engaging in H1-B Visa fraud, but they are also bringing Indian nationals into the US and under conditions of human bondage. US companies certainly know this, and seem to continue to hire IT resources through Indian companies. But companies like Apple are nice enough to declare to IT suppliers that they don’t want bonded or coerced labor (in the US). Which is odd, because Apple is fine with coerced labor if it is in China. The primary issue is that Apple is fine with coerced labor (that is why they went to China in the first place), but Apple prefers that the word coerced is not used. Coercion and bonded labor….and perhaps full-on slavery is perfectly fine, but it is the usage of these terms that is offensive.
If the US does not enforce its labor laws, then they do not exist. Indian firms have demonstrated such a pattern of violating US labor laws that there should be many investigations opened against Indian firms. The reason? The evidence is clear that Indian firms in a very unique way are engaging in bonded labor. That bonded labor is through a contract which is originated in India, but it is carried out in the US.
Part of the idea of IT workers from India being allowed to work in the primary IT markets was that these companies were going to obtain the skills they needed. However, there is now a great deal of evidence that many of these skills are falsified. But furthermore, because of the influence of Indian IT companies, US labor laws are being degraded, and the impact is that not only Indian workers are being subject to highly inappropriate contracts, but Indian companies seek to place domestic workers under these same contracts, contracts that are set up under Indian labor standards and practices rather than US labor standards and practices.
Related Brightwork Indian IT Content
Scroll down to see more articles.
This is an excellent video that shows the estimates of slavery that currently exists in the world. The topic becomes more complex when one includes bonded labor. Bonded labor can be a difficult distinction from slavery. Indian immigrants are paid well compared to people with the same skills that work in India, but they are in many cases still controlled by a bond or by the H1-B process, that makes them subordinate to their employers. Employers are constantly looking for labor that can be bonded or enslaved.
Internationally, Indians have demonstrated a pattern of discriminating against non-Indian workers.
With the growing concentration of Indians in IT this is a problem for domestic workers worldwide.
The more Indians get to know what a domestic IT worker does, the more they can determine if there is someone they know who can replace that domestic worker with an Indian friend or acquaintance.
Indian discrimination against non-Indians and other out-group Indians is pervasive in the IT sector in locations where Indians have emigrated. This discrimination is invisible and uncovered by the major IT media entities. For this reason, this article you are about to read will seems dramatically different than any article published in any major IT media entity. We cover why this issue is blacked out in IT media in the article Why IT Media Turns a Blind Eye to Indian IT.
The Convergence of Reports from All Directions
The first items we wanted to present are quotations from Quora. This is so that before we get into our own analysis, we wanted to provide quotations on the topic that we had nothing to do with creating. Indians that push back on this story generally like to propose that the entire situation is made up and that Indians do not demonstrate the pattern described in this article. However, comments, both public and privately shared paint the same picture.
These quotations illustrate a convergence of observation on the topic of Indian discrimination against non-Indians. It will be illustrated that explained discrimination is more narrow than this, with the discrimination being for a particular subset of Indians versus both non-Indians and other Indians.
Indians as Discriminating Against Other Indians
The following is a description of how they normally see the discrimination begin. This observation was written by an Indian.
“Many Indians in IT firms don’t just discriminate at the national level, many of them discriminate on a religion, race or caste-level. It usually starts like this.
They first look at your name in the resume. Is it a “cool” sounding Brahmin name? (like Anand Gopalakrishnan). Or is it a Punjabi name? (Parminder Singh). Or perhaps, it’s a Telugu name (Sudheer Reddy). Or does your name sound totally unheard of, hard to pronounce and possibly from a lower caste? (Pazhanimuththu Kanakadas). Godforbid, hopefully it isn’t a Muslim name (Imtiaz Khan), an Indian Christian name (David Kamaraj) or a Chinese name (Pang Pang).”
This illustrates that even Indians that are not in the right caste or have the right religion from the dominant group receive discrimination. The employment in the US for instance of Indians is not from all parts of India. It is very concentrated in specific areas of India and from specific castes, with Bhraman being the dominant caste.
Typically the US anti-discrimination laws are centered on race. First, they are only typically enforced for minority groups against whites. There is virtually no concern for discrimination by minorities against whites or other minorities. Second, Indian discrimination is more complicated than racial discrimination. Indians have a complicated discrimination modality that is sub-race and is a combination of Indians from specific areas and beyond that caste. Indians prefer a type of scenario which they had back in India. So the preference is from Brahmans to be at the top of the organizations. For most outsiders, their divisions are invisible, as each of the groups is seen as “Indian” by Western eyes (or at least all by the most trained). But for Indians, these divisions are highly important. They determine who can be hired into what role, how they relate to others, who have status over others, and so on.
Domestic workers who get Indian bosses normally don’t enjoy the experience. Indian standards for labor are terrible in India and abuse is common.
Dealing with Abusive Indian Management Approaches
“If you are Black, Asian or from the middle-east, the answer is obvious. Racism.
If you are white, it’s not so much the case that hiring you is expensive, as it is that you are a flight risk. American locals wouldn’t take kindly to the authoritarian and abusive management style of Indian managers and Indian managers are aware of it.”
Indians do not create environments that non-Indians want to work. They are hostile environments. The major Indian consulting companies, for instance, Infosys, WiPro, HCL, Cognizant, and TATA or TCS employ mostly Indians in the US but are only occasionally subject to well-known discrimination lawsuits. Various Indian firms play settlements to the US Department of Justice, as covered in the following quotation.
“The settlement, which the U.S. Justice Department said was the largest in a case of alleged civil fraud over visas, was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
Infosys, India’s second-largest IT services exporter, agreed in the settlement that it committed civil violations of U.S. employment law, but it was not required to admit and did not admit widespread further wrongdoing.”
India has never developed a system of regulations that protect employees. Bonded labor is considered normal and acceptable in India. India does not have what those in the developed world would consider a functioning government. The Indian government is so corrupt it has made no progress on a host of quality of life issues since the British left India over 73 years ago.
India’s population continues to grow, but things are getting worse, not better. Indian income inequality has increased over the past several decades. Even issues like water management are a massive problem.
More than 600 million Indians face “acute water shortages,” according to a report last summer by NITI Aayog, a prominent government think tank. Seventy percent of the nation’s water supply is contaminated, causing an estimated 200,000 deaths a year. Some 21 cities could run out of groundwater as early as next year, including Bangalore and New Delhi, the report found. Forty percent of the population, or more than 500 million people, will have “no access to drinking water” by 2030. – Technology Review
India cannot manage water because India is not a national government in the sense the US, New Zealand or Germany have national governments. This gets to the dysfunctional nature of India’s government, which places it as in danger of being simply a failed state.
This is the Failed State Index. Let us review the definition of a failed state.
A failed state is a political body that has disintegrated to a point where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government no longer function properly. – Wikipedia
India very close to being a failed state. Its next-door neighbor Pakistan, is a failed state. When Indians immigrate to European based countries they are receiving a massive upgrade. Those people that get out of India have a constant series of request from family members and members of a similar tribe to get them jobs in the US. This is why US workers are targeted by Indians.
Indians see it as their duty to get jobs for family and tribe members in the US to get them out of India. Imaging being pressured by family members and by friends to get them to the US. The social pressure in Indian society is intense.
Indians need to solidify their position in the US, to reduce job threats, they feel more comfortable and protected if surrounded by other Indians.
The Indian Rights Over Non-India Derived Countries
Indians who emigrated to European based countries think they are obtaining rights because they are so amazing, but what they do not realize is that they are leveraging systems of regulations and laws that they had nothing to do with building. All they did was jump on an airplane, and this allowed them to benefit from hundreds of years of European based progress. However, Indians don’t actually see it this way. To their mind, they earned all of the benefits that were created by entirely different cultures. And furthermore, they see believe that more Indians also deserve this. As for improving conditions in India, this is well known to not be possible. As for fighting for union rights in India, this will also never happen. But Indians will migrate to European based systems and both benefit from and at the same time degrade the labor rights within those countries. They have done this by both bringing discrimination into the labor markets where they have migrated and by acting as recruiters and creating contractual documents that are inconsistent with the labor standards in these countries.
Evidence for this degradation of labor standards is found in how Indian recruiting companies offer contracts to domestic employees that are entirely contrary to US employment norms as we covered in the article Contract Clauses to Watch Out for In Indian Professional Service Agreements. This recruiting company that was profiled in this case study not only offered this contract but then lied about the clauses within the contract.
When Indian firms are caught violating US employment law, they pay out fines. When the US Government receives these funds, they do nothing for US domestic workers, they simply consume the funds. However, the damaged parties are actually the domestic worker, not the US Government. The fines are never enough to alter behavior.
Breaking the H1-B Laws and Easily Paying out the Fines
However, at the fines imposed of 1 million dollars or 34 million dollars paid out occasionally, Indian firms can afford to pay out fines indefinitely. That is they can see it as a cost of doing business.
None of the Indian firms in IT have employee compositions that look anything like the typical demographics in the countries they operate outside of India. However, each of these firms could argue that because they are terrible companies to work for that only nearly no Americans would want to work there. However, even though they freely discriminate, the US does not bring actions against them. This allows the Indian firms to continue acting as they always do.
How The Major Indian Consulting Firms Displace Domestic Workers from Jobs
When Infosys, WiPro or TATA sell a project in the US or Europe it means that the team will be primarily Indian. Domestic workers lose jobs when this happens. There are many companies like Cisco, IBM, Oracle, and HPE that are founded in the US and in their heritage and in their perception but are highly Indian. And domestic firms that become Indian seem to go in one direction. That is they become progressively more Indian. IBM stopped reporting employment by country because IBM has been laying off domestic workers in primary markets for IT services (US, Europe, Australia, Canada) and replacing them with Indian workers. Intel has been classifying Indian workers as domestic to also, hide the fact that Intel is becoming increasingly Indian.
The Importance of Hiding the Speed of the Transformation
Companies that become strongly Indian hide that fact from both customers and from the general public and this leads to a great underestimation of the degree to which domestic companies are becoming strongly Indian. IT media seems to think this issue is not worth covering, and they represent the interests of the employing companies over the workers. Indians see this massive takeover of US and Europe IT as a very positive development and as a success. However, every job consumed by an Indian worker is taken from a domestic worker. The reason being that India primarily offers workers. There is close to zero demand generated from India in IT.
Companies like Accenture or Deloitte do not sell consulting projects in India, they use Indian workers to displace domestic workers in the primary IT markets.
This is the same modality of commerce as is found in the Middle East in construction projects. Indian (and Pakistan) construction workers come over to various Middle East countries and displace workers in those countries. However, in those cases, the workers do not become Saudi or Dubai citizens. They eventually go back to India.
There is little “trade” between the primary IT markets, the primary IT markets are either importing Indian workers, who eventually become citizens or outsourcing work to Indian firms in India. There is simply no getting around these are jobs that would ordinarily be performed by domestic workers. Indian workers in the primary IT markets do not “make the pie bigger” for non-Indian workers. They take a slice out of the pie, and an increasingly large slice. And once that slice is taken, it grows to a larger and large slice.
Indian Workers and Income Inequality
Furthermore, the jobs taken from the domestic worker not only transfer wealth from the domestic worker to the Indian worker, and make the work environment hostile for the other domestic workers, they also increase income inequality in the domestic location. Through the H1-B program US companies have booked far more profits than they would have if they had not had the H1-B program, and that is what is undiscussed in the Indian media. That this leads to higher income inequality in the US and in the other primary IT markets.
How The Indian Bias Against Non-Indians Extends to Indians in a Tribal Manner
“So is there a bias towards Indians while hiring for IT positions in Indian-run companies? Definitely. And that too, it’s a bias only towards a small sub-section of Indians.”
For the domestic workers, it is not particularly material if Indians discriminate against Indians that are not part of whatever the in group appears to be. This is because the majority of Indians that immigrate to developed countries discriminate against the domestic population within that country. It cannot be said that because Indians discriminate against other Indians as well, that discrimination is not an issue. When Indians discriminate against the domestic population they are in violation of US anti-discrimination laws. The problem is one of perception and unequal treatment of who can claim discrimination. That is discrimination is only discrimination if the discrimination is undertaken by some groups. Other groups demonstrate high levels of discrimination can’t be charged with doing so. At least that appears to be the logic.
The Indians in the US are actually from a very small part of India, and the Indians from this region treat the H1-B program as their property. This region not only claims the vast majority of H1-B visas versus the rest of India, but the vast majority of H1-B visas versus the rest of the world. If this region has not rigged the H1-B system, one has to ask why this pattern exists.
Where Are Indians in the US Primarily From in India?
Most Americans have no idea where different Indians are from, are unaware of the regional or other differences in India.
To most Americans any Indian is simply “from India” and that is the end of it. However, the Indians that come to the US for IT work are from one specific area according to not only this commenter but others we have interviewed.
“If you take a count of the total people hired in US in IT, you will find that 90 to 95% of them are from Andhra Pradesh in India. I have worked for several companies in the bay area and other states and in spite of my experience and skills was always threatened by an incapable Telugu manager, Lead or candidate who only wanted to hire people of his caste. As if this was not enough, most of the Indian recruiting companies in the Bay Area are run by Telugu people who prefer to hire people from their region/caste and also work hand in hand with hiring managers to give a commission off the rates they make. This is very well known and widely practiced in companies such as CISCO and many others in the bay area. There are instances when my recruiting company told me that my resume didn’t stand a chance because the other recruiting company that was working with this client was bribing managers to get their folks in. The result you see is incompetent inexperienced people who get hired for low rates, the cuts off salary goes to the recruiting company and hiring manager. No guessing how this has affected the IT job market. Really surprised this crap has been going on for the last 10 years or so and nothing has been done about it.”
No doubt this article will be unpopular, but this is extremely specific information. What is the motivation to make this type of information up? It seems there is very little incentive.
It is literally unheard of for people to bribe people to get people into a company, but the topic of bribery repeatedly comes up when describing Indian hiring. And this apparently is a point of contention for other Indians.
“Absolutely, sometimes you can even find Indians who got frustrated by this because they are born in the wrong part of India.”
And this gets to not only the discrimination against Indians but the fact that there are enormous numbers of Indians who want to come to the US (or Europe, or Australia), but can’t because they are not in the right group.
There are roughly 146 million jobs in the US, and if Indians could have their preference, all of those jobs would be filled by Indians, and given the situation in India, the only limitation is the inability of Indians to take those jobs.
The number of US jobs (or Europe or Australia, etc..) that are made available to Indians is the number that will be taken.
No matter how many jobs are consumed by Indians, even if all of the employees in all of the developed countries were consumed, it would still not satisfy the demand for jobs in India. India has a larger population than the US, Western Europe, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand combined. That is all the places that Indians would like to work, by a very large margin.
The speed of transformation of IT in the US to highly and in some cases predominantly Indian is breathtaking. IT departments now bear no relationship to the racial composition of the rest of the companies where the IT departments are housed.
How to Domestic Firms With Previously Domestic Labor Become Indian so Quickly?
Indians like to propose that they are so skilled that companies become Indian after the first small number of Indians are hired because of the demand for skills. This is a rather curious position that Indians are not only more skilled than any one group but than all other groups. And that further Indians from one part of India are also more skilled than all of the other Indians from other parts of India.
However, this following quotation brings up a different reason.
“I have worked in Silicon Valley in both startups and big companies and my experience is the same as what the question says: Indians will ONLY hire other Indians and, like other people mentioned, they will only hire Indians like them. This is true most of the time with Indians who arrived in Silicon Valley to work or to go to University to study. The next generation, the Indians who were born here, is more Americanized and therefore more attuned to the principles of fairness and judging somebody on their merits, not on who they are related to or who are their friends with.”
How Indians Proliferate More Indians
This is an entirely different commenter than the commenter from the previous quotations. This commenter goes on to describe a pattern of infiltration that occurs after the first Indians begin to work at a firm.
“I can tell you it is something that is recognized and spoken by everyone here. I have friends from all ethnic groups (Latino, Chinese, Japanese, White) and they all say the same thing: once an Indian is hired in a position of relative power (say middle management) a constant stream of resumes from his family or friends will come and, after that, most of the group will be Indian. I, like other people who answered, also have very good Indian friends and they themselves say the same thing: Indians have a long-running tradition of nepotism and cronyism and they do the same here in Silicon Valley. It is not uncommon to go to a startup run by Indian management or a big company with Indian managers and see their relatives working there (the second cousin, the brother-in-law, the wife, the son and so on). This, of course, is not a problem, if people were qualified for the job they do. Sadly, in a lot of cases that is not the case, they get the job because a relative got it for them.”
Why would nepotism and cronyism be so consistently attributed to Indians who immigrate to other countries? This further brings up the question of what happens when Indians are hired? Does the hiring of a few Indians necessarily mean that many more Indians will soon be working at that company?
Indians are renown for falsifying their resumes. The Indian term for this is “spicing” the resume. Indians firms such as Infosys, Wipro and TATA are renowned for doing this.
There are also many cases where one Indian will take an interview, but then another will show up for the job. It takes a while to figure out that the person that is showing up to work is not the person interviewing.
How Highly Skilled Again?
In the Indian media, they routinely use the term “highly skilled.”
However, while that is the description of an H1-B Visa, and the original logic of the program, only a small fraction of the H1-B Visa holders fall into this category.
At Brightwork we have received repeated requests from people in India who are recent college graduates with no special skills to sponsor them for an H1-B Visa. The concept among Indians is the H1-B program is a system to be scammed.
At several SAP consulting companies we found large scale resume falsification on the part of H1-B Visa holders.
At one consulting firm the H1-B Visa holders have a particular incentive to falsify their resume as if they did not get staffed, they would have a high likelihood of being let go, which could very likely mean having to move back to India.
However, the H1-B program was never passed into law under the concept that just about any Indian who has an education would be able to qualify for one. The H1-B Visa is viewed in India as the best opportunity to improve one’s condition in life. Therefore, the incentives to do what is necessary to stay are extremely high. This is not to say that domestic resources do not also have an incentive to be successful, but with a domestic resource, their jobs are not tied to their citizenship or their rights to stay in the country. To a worker from Denmark or Italy, it does not improve their condition all that much if they stay in the US or go back home.
But to Indians, it is a major upgrade in their lives and in the lives of their families. Nearly every H1-B Visa holder’s goal is to move to become a citizen. As one moves through the various stages to citizenship, the ability of the employer to control them decreases. And their pay and other freedom increase.
Experiences from Singapore With Those Discriminated Against by Indians
Indian behavior of immigrants is similar the world over.
This following quotation is from a commenter from Singapore.
“They created a lot of new manager roles so that they can send their friends in. 5 years ago, we had 1 manager and 15 guys. Now, 7 guys with 3 managers! (The rest left of moved). They force people out by abusing their power. Every year, they have to publish a organization chart. When they realized that all the managers are Indians,(In Singapore, they are not the absolute minority, but definitely low in numbers.) they gave an organization chart without picture! No one will notice that right? Except we are the only region in the world that does not have a picture on the organization chart! So in the end, Indian managers are definitely having some big problems. But due to the political correctly, they can do it. But we can’t point it out. “Racialism “ I guess.”
It is not possible to know the race of this commenter, but most of Singapore’s population is ethnic Chinese. Therefore, it is curious that it may also not be possible for an ethnic Chinese Singaporean to call out this behavior for fear of being called racist.
India is a strongly hierarchical society that allows for very little questioning. Europe based countries would need to have their clocks turn back hundreds of years to approximate the lack of participation from the lower levels that are allowed in India.
Reinstituting an Indian Caste System Within Non-Indian Companies
India has a very rigid caste system that is originally based upon Hinduism where each group comes from a different part of the body as explained in the video above. Nearly all of the Indians in the US come from the higher castes and therefore are very accustomed to a rigid social hierarchy, to indifference to those lower on the social hierarchy and to being at the top of the social hierarchy.
The comfort level of Indians with a caste system is found in how Indians attempt to recreate the caste system in their workplaces in the countries to which they migrate. This is only made obvious in the later stages of their control over an organization, as the following quotation explains.
“Once Indians have taken over an organization, they would establish a caste system of Brahmin priest caste as senior managers. The Brahmin would act all civilize as vegetarians non-meat eaters while appointing lower caste Indians as middle management along with the Sikhs. The middle management Indians would be the ones who brutalize workers and do the bullying while the Brahmins just smiles and silently approve their discriminatory behavior. The organisation will turn into a caste system as follows:
Middle caste Indians + Sikh Indians
Harassment of non-Indians staff, in particular, sexual harassment, is not uncommon. Non Indians are deprived of career opportunities while bully to quit just so the Indians can import more Indians into the workplace using immigration loophole.”
The description above sounds horrible. It is the exact opposite of meritocracy and is essentially reinforced through Indians stacking the deck with as many possible Indians as possible. This reinforces a strategy used by Indians where they use their numbers to act as a “block.” In the US the domestic population tends to act as individuals. Certainly, there are various cliques and “networks.” For example, it is well known that when executives from Oracle begin working at a software vendor, that company can have a number of Oracle resources come over that form an Oracle clique at the new vendor. Oracle employees are so known for this, and so known for worsening the condition of companies that they migrate to, ex-Oracle employees are a considerable liability.
However, the descriptions of Indian behavior in their new adopted homes indicate that they form a semi-cohesive unit that discriminates in favor of more Indians at the expense of the domestic population. This is without considering how Indians generally make the companies they work for hostile to non-Indian workers in more subtle ways. This commenter brings up this point.
“In the end they aim to take over our IT industry and replace all workers with Indians.”
Yes, and what is stopping this?
Indians Acting as a Block Against Domestic Workers
If Indians act as a block and there are what amounts to an unlimited number of Indians who seek to leave India as they cannot make a comparable living in India when does this stop? The answer is it never does, not until domestic workers stand up and put a stop to it.
Currently, Indian companies like Wipro and TATA are known to be hostile to non-Indian workers, but companies like IBM and Oracle are so high in Indian concentration that they are considered less appealing to domestic workers. There is not a single domestic US company that increases its percentage of Indian workers in a significant way, that stays equally appealing as a work environment for domestic workers.
Let us review, the domestic workers in any country are supposed to be the first labor poor to pull on for workers. But Indian employment is changing that. Indians in India claim superior job rights over US citizens. And apparently, a very high percentage of the Indian workers in the US agree with this sentiment as it helps them increase their concentration in the companies they currently work.
High Percentages of Indians is Now Bocking Out Non-Indian Employment in IT in a Major Way
“I started noticing that 99% of the interviewing managers at a particular client, a large corporation, were Indian. I also started noticing that 99% of all my fellow vendors were Indian as well. I thought it was strange but I was new to servicing a client in the Bay Area. After ages of watching top-notch candidates get rejected with no reason or false reaons, especially my white and asian candidates, I knew something was up. The candidates all said the feedback (when we got it) made no sense, that the interviewer was rude to them, that the interview was impossibly short, heavy accent was challenging, questions were surface level etc. They were just staging these “interviews” to try and cover their rears, so they could hire their fellow Indians.”
Again, this is another very specific charge. Any interview can be rigged simply by the questions asked to one candidate versus another if the intent is to only hire the Indian candidate.
Can a Domestic Worker be Successful in a Predominantly Indian Company?
If you have read this far, you can probably guess the answer to this.
“So, because of this, Indian based consulting companies like TCS, HCL, Tech Mahindra, Wipro have taken over major corporations and just ignore (or just pay off) any discrimination lawsuits thrown at them in the USA and Canada but, continue to discriminate.
Unless you’re Indian, don’t even think about applying to Microsoft, Hewlett Packard, Adobe, many federal and state gov’ts, Google, Apple, T-Mobile, Dell, etc.
If you happen to land a job with a predominantly Indian company, they will sabotage you out of the picture.”
And then this comment, which seems to be nearly the same comment, but is from a different commenter.
“Check out Cisco, it’s no longer American company, but an Indian company. After years of quiet layoffs of American workers and replacing them with Indian workers. The CTO of Cisco, possibly a successor to John Chambers, is from India, has no computer science degree, and got famous for bungling a high flying project on bad data and poopooing iPhone while at Motorola.
Same thing with Qualcomm, Microsoft, Motorola, VMWare and many smaller IT department around the country, including Target and Ebay. The latter was recently hacked while their Indian IT workers slept on their jobs.”
This is another common comment, that Indians seek to undermine non-Indian workers already in companies. This is a very serious claim, but our experience on projects backs up this claim. We have observed the following phenomena working with many Indians.
If the Indian is your boss: He makes life very difficult for you.
If the Indian reports to you: He undermines you.
If the Indian is lower in the hierarchy, but not a direct report: He begins pleasantly but looks for some way to undermine you.
Being Setup to Lose by Indians
For domestic workers, there seems no way to win against Indians. This another point of emphasis. The Indian worker does not need to be in a position of power over the employee. They can work to undermine them to look less capable then they are. It appears that the motivation is to have the domestic worker leave, and this allows an opening for the Indian workers to recommend another Indian, which then strengthens their hand within the company. The Indian worker does not see the job they have as a merely a job. Rather it is a strategic possession to be expanded to others in the “in group.” The strategy is the group who is able to get more of their people into the company end up winning.
This following quote from a different commenter describes the exact same thing.
“I can personally vouch that your average Indian IT engineer is very ethnocentric, clannish and completely un-american in every sense of the word.
They do whatever they can to make sure that life for you (as a non-Indian) in their team becomes so hellish that you leave on your “own accord”. I’ve seen many of my friends just move on to other companies confronted by similar minded Indians. Some of them entirely left IT altogether.
I think they have completely decimated non-Indian diversity at the workplace and they want every company to resemble Oracle and Cisco, both of them are almost 100% Indian now with a few token whites and other folks (nevermind that they are fighting lawsuits by well-meaning professionals regarding their hiring practices).”
This includes yet another statement that Indians make a concerted effort to force out non-Indians.
Indian Dominance in IT Recruiting
Indians have not only taken over IT jobs, but they have also taken over IT recruiting and forced out domestic IT recruiters. Our email inboxes oftentimes the recipients of IT recruiters that are primarily Indian. This takeover of IT recruiting has occurred over even a shorter period of time than the takeover of IT employment. It is now uncommon to find domestic IT recruiters. The only conclusion is that the domestic IT recruiters have been forced from the market.
Secondly, when we compare the rates offered by Indians recruiters, the rates are always lower than for domestic recruiters.
This is a shocking and unanticipated outcome of the H1-B Visa program. Originally intended for highly skilled candidates, now nearly anyone qualifies. And Indian immigration and workplace discrimination has not only reduced the domestic employment in IT, but domestic employees must now mostly go through Indian recruiters, many of whom are calling from India. It would be unsurprising if Indian recruiters prefer to place Indian candidates.
Rigging Job Descriptions for H1-B Entry
It is difficult to not notice how specific many IT job descriptions have become. Many job descriptions essentially describe a candidate that does not exist. There is a rule about H1-B Visas that the job description must be published for a certain amount of time, and then evidence shown to immigration that no individuals could be found that would fit the job description. This is very easily managed by creating such a ridiculous job description that no domestic candidates qualify. Now, the job can be opened to a candidate from India who will add those qualifications to their resume. There is no validation of the skills listed on the resume, they are essentially self-reported.
This is the problem with the continual comments by Indian resources that the entirety of Indian immigration to the US under H1-B is based on skills. Skills can be added to resumes if the people filling out H1-B Visa applications simply declare that the individual from India has those skills. This is explained in the following quotation.
“Most people who apply for H1B have a Indian 3 year degree education which I strongly believe is no better than a High School Degree in United States.
These 3 year degree holders take a 2 or 3 month computer training and land in United States stating fake experience.
There are thousands of companies in India which aid these people file a H1B petition and secure visa. These IT companies where potential H1B aspirant claims to have worked for, exists only on paper. They answer verification phone calls from USCIS or US embassy, have a web site and a physical address but there is NO actual Programming or Development done by this companies.
After landing in the United States, the same people, put 7 or more years of experience in the United States to get job.” – Petition2Congress
Which led a commenter to state.
“Therefore, the bottom line is that we don’t need Fake IT Professionals who make up their fake degrees and fake resumes and take away our real jobs which is not acceptable at all. And I request the US Senate, The US Congress, The Homeland Security, and the USCIS and Labor Law departments to take the needed steps and right measurements to stop all these fraudulent workers, “
This quotation on a similar matter was from The Guardian from back in 2014.
“Labor brokers providing Indian high-tech workers to American companies have hijacked a professional visa program, creating an underground system of financial bondage by stealing wages and benefits, even suing workers who quit.
About 840,000 people from around the world work in the United States on temporary visas, intended to help companies seek uniquely talented employees for specific jobs. In the tech realm, labor brokers often sponsor the visas, then contract out the workers to technology companies or government agencies to build databases, test software and complete other technical projects.”
Once one investigates it turns out H1-B Visa fraud is incredibly common. Again from The Guardian.
“It has been the source of the vast majority of India’s fraudulent documents tied to H-1B visa applications, according to a June 2009 cable from the US State Department unearthed by WikiLeaks. Inflated work experience was a typical problem, the cable said, adding that of 150 companies in Hyderabad investigated by the US Consulate, 77% were “fraudulent or highly suspect.””
Wikileaks released a document that was internally sent out from the consulate in Chennai on this topic with the following quotation on this topic.
“India wide consular operations are among the busiest in the world. Some states such as Gujarat and Punjab are traditional sources of migration out of India and faudulent applications from these areas are more common than from other regions of India. The state of Andhra Pradesh, in particular, its capital of Hyderabad, has been identified as a large center of documentary fraud which affects all Indian posts. An opinion poll published in the popular Times of India in January 2007 noted that 37% of the 1.1 billion Indians would emigrate if they had the chance.
Most of India’s fraudulent applicants come from specific and easily defined regional areas within each consular district. These states have some of the most mobile populations in India and the largest concentrations of expatriate communities overseas, including in the United States. In New Delhi, cases originating from the Punjab comprise the majority of its IV and fraud caseloads, while the same can be said in Mumbai with Gujarat. Chennai and Hyderabad’s fraud workload comes principally from Andhra Pradesh.
B1/B2 visa fraud is the most commonplace. Regionally-based fraud rings throughout the country, but especially in Hyderabad, continue to produce fraudulent documents for visa application and travel purposes. Some visa “consultants” and travel agents specialize in fraudulent experience letters and fake document packages, which include passport copies of false relatives, bogus financial documents, and affidavits of support.”
India scores 140 out of 180 countries in press freedom.
Indian Respect for Freedom of Speech and of the Press
India has historically never had any freedom of speech or of the press. This is how India has remained as the twelfth most income unequal country in the world. This inequality is why India is such a hotbed for bonded labor. To maintain this level of income inequality, suppression of freedom of speech is necessary. And most Indians will oppose this article. Opposing even the right for it to be written. In fact, on a different topic and Indian employee of IBM did not like something published at Brightworks, and essentially claimed the right to state that it should not be published as we cover in the article Should an IBM Employee Determine What a Research Entity Publishes?
Again freedom of speech is part of US law, it is respected in Europe and countries based on European systems, not Indian law, and the established preference is for Indian law…..but not in India, in the US. India cannot change internally because India has very low freedom of the press. According to Reporters without Borders, India ranks 138 out of 180 countries in press freedom. Articles written in the Indian press have a distinct stamp of being censored or self-censored, and there is no India media outlet that is prominent or read outside of Indian readers.
Indian Immigration Beneficial for India?
Given the enormous transfer of wealth to people from India to the US, many of whom falsely qualified for H1-B status, one might think that India has greatly benefited. Well first, India’s population is around 1.34 billion, so as even though IT in the US and in the other primary IT markets have become swamped with Indian labor, it is still a tiny fraction of the population in India. But one must also include all of the outsourced IT work in India and the jobs that only exist because of the IT connection to the primary IT markets.
However, India’s income inequality is getting starkly worse as the following quotation attests.
“As of Nov 2016, India is the 12th most unequal country in the world.  The richest 1% of Indians own 58.4% of wealth. The richest 10 % of the Indians own 80.7 % of the wealth. This trend is going in the upward direction every year, which means the rich are getting richer at a much faster rate than the poor.” – Wikipedia
India a vast country either tied with or greater than China depending upon the statistics used, those with access to the international IT market is still a small percentage of India. IT in India is similarly concentrated in just a few cites like Hyderabad. India already had debilitating income inequality before the rise of Indian IT workers. And India’s income inequality is growing rapidly. Could it be that the income flowing into a small percentage of Indians some of who work overseas and some of who work in India is actually hurting India’s political stability? That is the IT industry creates a class of IT-based wealth that is distinct from the rest of India? When one looks at India, there is no way that the impulse to leave India will be moderated by Indians. The flow has to be restricted within the primary IT markets. In this way, the combination of overseas Indian IT workers and Indian based IT workers is increasing the income inequality in both India and the primary IT markets of the US, Western Europe, Australia, and Canada.
Finding Other Groups As Frequently Accused of Discrimination as Indians
Brightwork Research & Analysis is a research entity. We are known for tackling issues that almost no one else will. We approached this topic as a research question, and we found damning evidence against Indian employment or workplace discrimination that is only reinforced by what we have seen on many projects. This Indian employment discrimination is not merely limited to the US but is found in Asia and in Australia, in Europe and in Africa. The standard defense by Indians will naturally be that this is all a racist illusion by a white author. However, Indians are being accused of discrimination worldwide. And they are being accused of discrimination by non-whites. If this is all a giant racist conspiracy, it is not only extremely widely reported, but the same reports are coming in from many different areas. All of the quotations in this article were obviously not written by the author.
Companies in IT globally are becoming Indian at astonishing rates. IBM has so aggressively fired domestic workers and hired workers in India and Indian workers that they refuse to publish their employment by country. However, IBM has kept its rates where they were previously, which has allowed them to mask the overall decline of the company. It seems impossible for this to happen without something underhanded occurring. It is very difficult to find a field that has in the space of a few decades switched to dramatically over to a new group of immigrants. And not only a group of immigrants (which has never happened in US history) but a group of immigrants primarily from one part of India.
We could find no other race or group that was as frequently accused of employment or workplace discrimination as Indians. For these observations to be false, there would have to be a vast conspiracy to promote the reporting of accusations against Indians and no other group.
The author has witnessed this discrimination first hand, and we receive new reports of discrimination quite frequently.
The problems laid out in this article, as bad as they are, set to become even worse. The continual emigration of Indians to non-Indian countries is leading to negative consequences for domestic workers in each country.
The Large Financial Incentives to Continue Indian Immigration
Consider that Indians are now a highly concentrated interest group in each country that has accepted Indians to continue the various H1-B type programs. Fortunes have been made on Indian labor, promoting its continuance of the status quo. There is no opportunity to attain much wealth in India as low pay persists — for millions of Indians there only chance to improve their lives is to immigrate to a (primarily) European based country. The number of people that will leave India is only limited by the number of open slots.
This hostility of work environment against domestic workers in areas ranging from Singapore to Australia to the US to Europe and elsewhere is part of how Indian workers are continually pushing domestic workers out of IT employment. There are two sources that dispute the demonstrated discrimination against non-Indian workers.
Indians: Indians will often say that all of these independent observations are incorrect. The strategy only works if it is not declared. If Indians were to say that they intend to bring practices of nepotism and discrimination over to the countries they immigrate to then the game would be up.
Indian Companies: Most of their statements revolve around disputing that they violated the employment laws or visa laws in the countries of the primary IT markets, or hiding the massive rise in Indian employment.
Domestic Companies: These companies don’t really address this issue. They simply continue to beat the drum that they need skills.
Selling a Fake Story About Indian IT Employment
Indian workers and employing companies use terms like skills when describing H1-B quotas and hiring, but this is an oversimplification of the actual factors that are driving H1-B and the highly disproportionate hiring of Indian workers. It is clear that other terms like income inequality, lower pay, job loss for domestic workers, the creation of hostile work environments for domestic workers and workplace discrimination by Indians against non-Indians needs to become more publicly associated with importing Indian workers.
Most Indian and many Americans have no idea that the rights they enjoy are because they were fought for by unions. Indians made no such improvement to living conditions in their country. This is one reason they seek to exit the country and to gain entry into countries where this had been done for them already. In speaking with a number of Indians it is clear that they are entirely unaware of this history.
Major media outlets hide the union battles that have been fought in the US, because the behavior on the part of companies was so appalling, and because major financial interests do not want people thinking in terms of unions.
Notice how the share of income changes depending upon how strong and prevalent unions are. In IT there has been a dramatic transfer of income away from domestic workers and towards the top 10% and to Indian immigrants. This has lead to dramatically fewer opportunities for domestic workers. This is the point of the H1-B program — it is not about skills, it is about altering the income distribution away from domestic workers.
Nearly all of the immigration into the US over the past several decades has come at the top and bottom of the income ladder — and this is further exacerbating income inequality, which has the impact of reducing the stability of the overall system.
The major financial entities and employers want people to think that they don’t need unions. That unions are an organizational unit from a different era. If unions had maintained their strength from the 1960s, its unlikely that the H1-B program would have ever been allowed.
The Undeniable Evidence of Indian Discriminatory Behavior
The evidence is piling up that this is a pattern that is applied by Indians globally. Indians bring their culture from India seek to use lower standards to undermine the standards in the countries to which they immigrate. Indians that migrate to the US or Europe will not stay in India and fight for changes in how women in India are treated, fight the corruption in India, fight for higher labor standards, but what they will do is immigrate to countries that have made these gains, benefit from these gains, but then undermine the workers in the developed world. As such, Indian workers are a threat to all domestic workers, regardless of how “cuddly” they present themselves in one on one interactions.
From this, it is not difficult to predict that it will be very difficult for domestic workers to become employed in IT. This is because these jobs are increasingly going to be reserved for not only Indians already in developed countries but for future Indian immigrants and for Indians children of current Indian immigrants. If the pattern holds then the children of Indian immigrants will also be highly prevalent in IT. Once most of the jobs are held by Indians, it will become very difficult to break into the field due to Indian workplace discrimination.
How Indians Rely on Not Being Called Out on Cheating
What this comes down to is cheating. And unless domestic workers begin to call out this cheating, the cheating will continue. Naturally, the entities performing the cheating do not want to admit to the cheating and want to continue as business as usual. Therefore they will adhere to the “skills” argument and most likely throw ad hominem or personal attacks at those that point out the cheating. Literally, the entirety of the Indian takeover of IT jobs in the major IT markets is based upon one central hypothesis….that Indians have superior IT skills to all other workers — (not only the domestic workers but workers in the Andhra Pradesh region of India). On the basis of this argument, these workers essentially are demanding that most of the IT jobs in the major IT markets be handed over to these workers and that they are granted citizenship rights in the major IT market countries. However, once the topic is investigated, it becomes increasingly difficult to accept the premise of these arguments.
Consulting companies nearly always rig software selections so that the vendor they make money from wins.
As this is fraud on the part of the consulting firm, it is by its nature criminal.
IT consulting is normally all about sales and billing hours. The best way to maximize billing hours is to get clients to implement the most complicated and expensive applications. To do this, consulting companies pretend to be independent software vendors, which ultimately leads them to be selected.
An RFP is how requirements are documented to know what is needed when evaluating different vendors. However, as explained in the book How to Rig an RFP to Maximize Billing Hours consulting companies normally do not allow customers to select from vendors that are the best match for the requirements. This is because it would be detrimental to billing hours. Therefore, the RFP must be rigged so that the software selection results in the “right answer,” the right answer is implementing the software that the consulting company has resources it can bill for. This is known in the industry and considered entirely normal. The consulting company engages in fraud when they declare to their client that they will help them select the best vendor for their requirements. What they mean is they will select the best vendor for the consulting company.
IT consulting is filled with misrepresentations that should qualify as fraud. Many IT consulting companies engage in behavior that should be subject to not only civil but to criminal implications. Software selection fraud is just one of the many areas by which IT consulting firms routinely defraud their clients. The consulting companies do a double disservice to their clients because even after they leave, the customer is stuck with software which was normally selected only because of the needs of the consulting company. Consulting companies walk out of clients all the time, and perpetuate the same fraudulent tactics on their next clients. Having worked in IT consulting for decades and with many different firms (as an employee, as a sub-contractor, as just another consultant reporting directly to the end client) there is not one of the consulting companies that we would trust to do a software selection. IT consulting companies are dedicated to doing what they can to get the most out of the software selection for themselves while leaving the least benefit for their clients.
Consulting companies nearly always greatly exaggerate their capabilities to customers.
Consulting companies routinely engage in behavior which is criminal as it violates fraud statutes.
IT consulting is normally all about sales and billing hours. Having worked on IT projects for many years, it has been extremely rare to find projects where the capabilities of the consulting company have not been greatly exaggerated by the partner level resources.
Fraud Versus Puffery
Fraud is when one misrepresents a product or service. One this is sold, and something else entirely, of lower value, is delivered. For IT consulting companies it is common to lie about the following areas.
A Unique Methodology: Nearly all consulting companies state that they offer a special or unique methodology for implementation. We reviewed many consulting methodologies in the article The Real Story on IT Implementation Methodologies. Our observation was that there was nothing special about any of them and that they were primarily designed to sell IT projects.
Special Resources: Exaggerating the training and expertise of resources is extremely common in IT consulting. Resources often have skills listed for which they have only a passing exposure. At one consulting company resources that had performed demos, altered their resumes to state that they had participated in full implementations for customers they had only prepared a demo. Sometimes the exaggerated skills are added by the resource themselves, and sometimes they are added by the consulting company.
Pretending Public Information is Specific to a Consulting Company: IT consulting companies will often overstate the degree to which they have contributed to their area versus how much they have taken material available from published books and articles.
Timelines: It is highly common for consulting companies to exaggerate the speed at which they can implement software.
IT consulting is filled with misrepresentations that should qualify as fraud. Many IT consulting companies engage in behavior that should be subject to not only civil but to criminal implications. Furthermore, IT consulting companies use these same fraudulent tactics and patterns against US government agencies.