Country Distribution of EB-GC Process

Printable View

10-03-2014, 08:58 PM
imdeng

Country Distribution of EB-GC Process

Ohhh Boy! I can not even wrap my head around EB3I COD moving past EB2I COD!! Reverse Porting - Imagine! How things have changed.

We are seeing a complete realignment of employment based GC demographic from a well diversified pool to a basically India and Everyone Else scenario. Recession can't be the only reason that has made all non-India EB-GC demand to have declined this drastically - especially now that the job market has improved without corresponding increase in PERM numbers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

...If and when EB3-I moves beyond EB2-I COD (possibly as early as FY2017 in your scenario) then we will undoubtedly see greater EB3-I applications and reverse porting from EB2-I as was seen with China.
10-04-2014, 08:54 AM
Spectator

Quote:

Originally Posted by imdeng

Ohhh Boy! I can not even wrap my head around EB3I COD moving past EB2I COD!! Reverse Porting - Imagine! How things have changed.

We are seeing a complete realignment of employment based GC demographic from a well diversified pool to a basically India and Everyone Else scenario. Recession can't be the only reason that has made all non-India EB-GC demand to have declined this drastically - especially now that the job market has improved without corresponding increase in PERM numbers.

imdeng,

I was being rather tongue in cheek with that comment!

Since, already working in the USA is pretty much a prerequisite in reality to starting the immigrant process, I wonder whether it might be more a function of the non-immigrant system.

Other than L1, which only applies to a small subset and has become more difficult to obtain, H1B is the main route to initial work in the USA for the majority.

That has become harder to obtain and is dominated by a huge number of applications from Indian MNC and "body shops". I don't recall the last numbers, but India uses a very large % of the H1B numbers each year. Also, because India has a very large number of students studying in the USA, there are a large number using OPT or CPT which makes it more likely they may be sponsored for H1B.

So, even if there is the will to work here, the opportunity has become limited for applicants from other Countries.

Even if all the approved H1B are not used to start work immediately (something that needs to be addressed), it skews the demographics of the pool of potential immigrants further down the line.

I'm sure it is more multi factored and the above is an over simplification, but I'm sure that is part of the reason.

I'm not sure any immigration system can deal with such lopsided demand.
10-04-2014, 09:57 AM
imdeng

I agree. This is a longer term issue and right now kind of out of popular discussion - but if the current trends continue then it is likely to become relevant.

Concentration of H1B among applicants from India is surely one of the reason. IMO, the concentration is also a result of all non-IT industries curtailing their H1B hiring significantly in past few years. H1B is a very frustrating process and there is an infrastructure/knowhow in India now on how to deal with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

...
I'm not sure any immigration system can deal with such lopsided demand.
10-04-2014, 10:19 AM
qesehmk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

I'm not sure any immigration system can deal with such lopsided demand.

Spec - I disagree with this statement. The demand is not lopsided either at EB level or at EB-I level.

The total immigration is 1M/year give or take a few hundred thousands. Out of that only 140K per year is EB. By simply removing the dependents or not requiring the dependents a visa number - the backlog will clear in 1-2 years.
10-04-2014, 10:44 AM
Spectator

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Spec - I disagree with this statement. The demand is not lopsided either at EB level or at EB-I level.

The total immigration is 1M/year give or take a few hundred thousands. Out of that only 140K per year is EB. By simply removing the dependents or not requiring the dependents a visa number - the backlog will clear in 1-2 years.

Q,

You can't seriously state that EB immigration demand is not lopsided. That was the initial discussion.

I agree that removing the dependents would clear the backlog in fairly short order (it is something I have always advocated as THE fix), but that is just increasing the visa supply beyond the present demand. Ultimately, taken to the extreme, that becomes an open border policy, which may not be what the USA wishes to see.

Under the current system, with a limited visa supply that is less than the underlying demand, then lopsided demand from one (or a few) Countries is a difficult problem, particularly when the present Categories don't really necessarily prioritize need or skills adequately.

The excessive retrogression of some Categories/Countries is a testament to that fact.
10-04-2014, 11:04 AM
qesehmk

Spec

EB Immigration demand relative to overall demand is not at all lopsided because EB demand is still 20% or less compared to overall Green Card demand.

So I would take you are referring to EB-I demand within EB demand. I agree EB-I demand is more than India's population proportion in the world. But they are fulfilling a need.

The overall number per year is still 60-70K MAX. That is still tiny considering overall demand of GC.

The problem is not demand. The problem is stupid policy of immigration that gives away millions of GCs to FB category and only 140K to EB. It should be the other way round. EB should get more and non-EB should be limited. But the immigration policy has got it backwards.

To summarize - isolating Indian immigration demand to EB-I demand and then calling it lopsided is not a good way to look at the problem. The problem lies on the supply side which is
A) unnecessarily restricted overall.
B) out of balance between EB and FB
C) unfairly provided between countries (using country limit).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectator

Q,

You can't seriously state that EB immigration demand is not lopsided. That was the initial discussion.

I agree that removing the dependents would clear the backlog in fairly short order (it is something I have always advocated as THE fix), but that is just increasing the visa supply beyond the present demand. Ultimately, taken to the extreme, that becomes an open border policy, which may not be what the USA wishes to see.

Under the current system, with a limited visa supply that is less than the underlying demand, then lopsided demand from one (or a few) Countries is a difficult problem, particularly when the present Categories don't really necessarily prioritize need or skills adequately.

The excessive retrogression of some Categories/Countries is a testament to that fact.
10-04-2014, 05:03 PM
imdeng

Perhaps this is not the best forum for this topic - but since I was part of starting off the discussion, I would like to summarize my pov and not take part in the discussion going forward.

If look at H1B-EBGC process in isolation, it is hard to not say that the process has been *gamed* by companies from India. We are all aware of sometimes shady/shoddy business practices in the industry. The domination of the current process by H1B applicants from India would clearly be considered extreme by any objective standards. It is not a public problem right now - but imagine if 80% of H1Bs and corresponding EB-2/3 continue to go to India for 10 years - it would produce a push back. I see the merit of the argument that EB visas should be country neutral - but if the policy results in a single country dominating the process then that casts doubts on whether all countries really have equal access to the process.

While I see the potential problem, I do not criticize folks who take advantage of the opportunities that the system provides them. In today's competitive world we all must leverage whatever foothold there may be in the wall - very similar to my approach to EB-3 to EB-2 porting.

Anyways - this discussion is tangential to the main purpose of this forum - so perhaps there isn't much point in continuing this forward. We all play with the cards we are dealt with - and the current system is the cards that are available.
10-04-2014, 05:15 PM
imdeng

Country Distribution of EB-GC Process

I am shifting posts on this topic from EB3 thread.
10-06-2014, 08:26 AM
kd2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Spec

EB Immigration demand relative to overall demand is not at all lopsided because EB demand is still 20% or less compared to overall Green Card demand.

So I would take you are referring to EB-I demand within EB demand. I agree EB-I demand is more than India's population proportion in the world. But they are fulfilling a need.

The overall number per year is still 60-70K MAX. That is still tiny considering overall demand of GC.

The problem is not demand. The problem is stupid policy of immigration that gives away millions of GCs to FB category and only 140K to EB. It should be the other way round. EB should get more and non-EB should be limited. But the immigration policy has got it backwards.

To summarize - isolating Indian immigration demand to EB-I demand and then calling it lopsided is not a good way to look at the problem. The problem lies on the supply side which is
A) unnecessarily restricted overall.
B) out of balance between EB and FB
C) unfairly provided between countries (using country limit).

Q, I would like to point out that FB immigration is about 226K, EB about 140K. The rest is immediate relatives including spouses of US citizens that have no quotas. They are nominally added in the 1 million total but should not be. From a policy perspective they just part of US citizen's immediate family.

So looking strictly at quota based immigration and its demand, yes both EB & FB have long lines indicating the quotas are outdated and need to be reformulated or done away with. I agree with you on that.
10-06-2014, 08:37 AM
qesehmk

Relatives is family KD. Right. Just because you pull it out of quota system - it doesn't change the fact that it is family based immigration.

I think that is the fallacy of immigration policy that FB and EB don't even have same priority. And another bigger fallacy is that in an aging society the level of immigration is quite low. 1M is just not enough to replace workers. It should be 1% the population i.e. 3M.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd2008

Q, I would like to point out that FB immigration is about 226K, EB about 140K. The rest is immediate relatives including spouses of US citizens that have no quotas. They are nominally added in the 1 million total but should not be. From a policy perspective they just part of US citizen's immediate family.

So looking strictly at quota based immigration and its demand, yes both EB & FB have long lines indicating the quotas are outdated and need to be reformulated or done away with. I agree with you on that.