[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 57 (Thursday, April 14, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2090-S2091]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REFORMING THE H-1B VISA PROGRAM
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I rise to speak about H-1B visas, often
called the high-skilled immigration visa. Every year, the U.S.
Government issues 85,000 new H-1B visas, including 20,000 for workers
with advanced degrees. This is in addition to hundreds of thousands of
foreign workers already in the United States on H-1B visas.
Beginning on April 1, employers can submit petitions for new H-1B
visas. Every year, within a few days, the government announces that it
has received many more petitions for visas than the number of visas
available.
The government then conducts a random lottery to decide which
employers will receive the visas. Every year this leads to a hue and
cry from our business community about the need to increase the annual
cap for H-1B visas.
Like clockwork, this process played out last week, just as it does
every year. Let's take a look at what happened.
When most people think of H-1B visas, they think of big tech
companies like Microsoft, Google, and Apple hiring top-notch computer
engineers, paying them top dollar to come in from overseas.
But here is the reality. In fact, the top recipients of H-1B visas
are foreign companies that use loopholes in the law to displace
qualified American workers and send American jobs offshore.
In 2013, outsourcing firms received more than 50 percent of the
annual H-1B visa cap. Think about that. Over half of these H-1B visas,
designed to bring skilled foreign workers into the United States, are
being given to foreign outsourcing companies.
It sounds wrong; doesn't it?
In 2014, 15 of the top 20 H-1B employers used the H-1B visa primarily
to offshore American jobs; that is, to take Americans, put them out of
work, and have foreign workers take their jobs. These 15 firms gobbled
up over 190,000 new H-1B visas over 10 years.
This is how it works. Foreign outsourcing companies import thousands
of foreign guest workers using H-1B visas. These companies then cut
deals with American companies to outsource American jobs and to move
them offshore. The United States keeps them in the United States but
with these foreign workers. The U.S. company gives their American
workers notice that they will be fired. But before the American workers
are laid off--listen to this--the American workers are forced to train
the foreign guest workers who are going to take over their jobs.
After they are trained, the outsourcing company returns the foreign
workers to their home country where--guess what--they compete with the
United States.
Most of these foreign outsourcing companies are from India: Infosys,
Tata, and Wipro. You may not recognize those names, but they are making
billions of dollars using the H-1B visa to outsource American jobs and
displace American workers.
A high-ranking Indian Government official even called the H-1B visa
``the outsourcing visa.'' The International Herald Tribune investigated
these Indian companies, and this is what they concluded: ``Rather than
building a thriving community of experts and innovators in the United
States, the Indian firms seek to funnel work--and expertise--away from
the country.''
Congress intended the H-1B program to allow an employer to hire a
skilled foreign worker in a specialized occupation when the American
employer couldn't find an American worker with those skills and
abilities.
We didn't create this program for foreign outsourcing firms to
exploit the program and to bring foreign workers to our country to be
trained by talented American workers in order to see their jobs shipped
away.
So let's take an example. In the last year alone, media reports have
documented the replacement of hundreds of American workers by these
foreign outsourcing companies. Let me give an example close to home.
Abbott Labs of
[[Page S2091]]
Illinois, headquartered near Chicago, signed a contract for information
technology services with Wipro, one of the largest foreign outsourcing
companies based in India and one of the top users of the H-1B visa
program.
Here is how it worked: Approximately 150 U.S. employees at Abbott
Labs in Illinois are going to lose their jobs. The workers being laid
off have stellar experience--many of them have been at Abbott for
years. They have the credentials, the performance reviews, and some
have amazing work records spanning decades at Abbott Labs. I know from
recent conversations with Abbott Labs employees that this layoff is
taking its toll on the morale of their remaining workforce.
When I heard about these plans, I wrote to Miles White, the CEO of
Abbott Labs. I urged him to reconsider this plan and to keep his
American workers who have worked so hard for Abbott Labs for years.
Well, I am sorry to report he responded to my letter and confirmed his
company's plans to terminate these American workers.
I am very concerned about Abbott Labs because they have required the
employees who are losing their jobs and being laid off to sign away
their right to sue or even disparage the company if they want to
receive any severance pay. As a result of this agreement, Congress and
the American people are unable to hear directly from the employees who
are affected by this decision at Abbott Labs--employees who are losing
their jobs to Wipro, an Indian company that specializes in outsourcing
American jobs. Abbot employees have told my staff they were concerned
that even if they spoke with our office about what was happening at
Abbott Labs, they could be placed in jeopardy.
Other companies that have signed contracts with foreign outsourcing
companies to replace American workers have also forced their employees
to sign these nondisparagement agreements. So we are in the dark about
the human impact of these outsourcing arrangements on the Americans
losing their jobs. What we do know is this: 150 skilled and experienced
American workers will lose their jobs and have had to sign an agreement
that they will not say anything negative about their current employer.
If they do not comply with that, they do not get their severance pay.
I sent a followup letter to Mr. White today about the gag order he
has forced on his employees. We should be able to hear firsthand from
workers who are losing their jobs because of outsourcing as to just
exactly what is happening to them.
Senator Chuck Grassley and I first introduced bipartisan legislation
to reform the H-1B visa program in 2007--almost a decade ago. Our bill
would end these abuses and protect American and foreign workers from
exploitation. The outsourcing companies are worried about our
legislation. For a long time, Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin were on
the front page of a lot of Indian newspapers. Listen to the corporate
jargon Wipro uses to talk about our bill:
With the growth of offshore outsourcing receiving
increasing political and media attention, there have been
concerted efforts to enact new legislation to restrict
offshore outsourcing. This may adversely impact our ability
to do business in these jurisdictions and could adversely
affect our revenues and operating profitability.
Let me be clear. My first obligation as a U.S. Senator is to protect
American workers. If that adversely affects the profits of a foreign
company that specializes in outsourcing American jobs, so be it.
In 2013 I joined the Gang of 8--Democrats and Republicans--and we put
together a comprehensive immigration reform bill. Corporate interests
fought hard to protect these H-1B visas, but we successfully included
several important changes to the program in the bill. Let me give an
example. Under current law, employers are permitted to pay H-1B visa
holders substandard wages, which creates an incentive to fire Americans
and hire foreign workers.
The vice president of Tata, out of India, one of the leading foreign
outsourcing firms, candidly acknowledged they use H-1B visas to
undercut American workers. Here is what he said:
Our wage per employee is 20-25 percent lesser than U.S.
wage for a similar employee. . . . The issue is that of
getting workers in the U.S. on wages far lower than local
wage.
He was pretty candid about it. The object is to put Americans out of
work and to charge less than what the Americans are being paid. So I
wrote a provision in the 2013 comprehensive immigration reform bill
that discouraged employers from hiring foreign workers as a source of
cheap labor by doubling the minimum wage of H-1B employees, and
employers of large numbers of H-1B visa holders would be required to
pay, at a minimum, the average wage paid to an American. That is why
the chief executive of Tata in India said our bill would have been
``very tough'' on outsourcing companies. So be it.
The Senate passed that bill on this floor 68 to 32. Unfortunately,
the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives refused to
even call the bill. They wouldn't debate it or call it for a vote.
Now, the two leading Republican Presidential candidates, Donald Trump
and the junior Senator from Texas, have jumped on the bandwagon. They
want to reform the H-1B program. Unfortunately, their track records
call into question their real commitment. Mr. Trump owns companies that
have sought to import at least 1,000 temporary guest workers while
turning away hundreds of American workers. In 2013, when the Judiciary
Committee considered the comprehensive immigration reform bill, Senator
Cruz of Texas offered an amendment to increase--increase--the annual
cap for H-1B visas to 325,000 per year--almost four times the current
number.
Nonetheless, if they have changed their mind out on the campaign
trail, we welcome that change of heart and welcome them to this debate.
We must reform the H-1B visa program and fix other parts of our broken
immigration system to protect American and immigrant workers. The
solution is still comprehensive immigration reform. The time for action
is now. Congress has avoided its responsibility for far too long.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________