The questions posed by two members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Refugees — Republican Senator Charles Grassley and Democratic Senator Richard Durbin — to nine companies regarding how they have used the H-1B visas granted to them last year, have once again raised fears that the protectionism tendency is down but not out in America. If anything, it has now turned ugly.
The problem is not exactly with their decision to question. In fact, the problem is not even with the questions. The questions seek largely factual information, and if the honorable senators can stop “misuse of H-1B visas” by getting answers to these questions, it is a very, very justifiable step.
The problem is with the selection of their target companies. All the nine firms — Infosys, Wipro, Tata Consultancy Services, Satyam, Patni, Larsen & Toubro Infotech, i-flex, Tech Mahindra and MphasiS — are India-headquartered companies. Sure, they are among the largest recepients of H-1B visas in 2006, but so are Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Intel, Cisco and Motorola, not to talk of other services firms like Cognizant, Deloitte and Ernst & Young.
What the senators have done is simple: They have taken the list of top 20 recipients of H-1B visas in 2006; ignored the 11 American companies that are in the list and shot off the letters to the rest nine companies. While doing so, they have not even gone beyond the official address. Even large offshore companies like Cognizant and HCL America which officially have American headquarters have not made it to their list of suspicion.
THIS TIME SENATORS TARGETED INDIAN FIRMS BY SELECTING NINE OUT OF TOP 20 RECIPIENTS OF H-1B VISAS IN 2006. SENATORS SIMPLY IGNORED THE REST 11 AMERICAN COMPANIES. THIS DISCRIMINATION IS PROTECTIONISM — TWO STEPS AHEAD OF ALL THAT WE HAVE SEEN SO FAR.
Consider this. Microsoft was the third largest recipient of H-1B visas in 2006. MphasiS was the 19th largest. Tech Mahindra was the 17th largest. How can they possibly solve the misuse issue by proving these small firms and ignoring the much larger ones?
What is the basis for assuming that by probing the Indian firms they will be able to find out about the “reported fraud and abuse of the H-1B and L visa programs”? Does it mean that the Indian firms are more likely to misuse the visas? If it is so, the letter does not say why.
They of course raise some concerns. And one of them is the issue of lay-offs. “A number of firms have allegedly laid off American workers while continuing to employ H-1B visa holders,” the letter notes. Anyone who even vaguely understands offshoring will very well know that the possibility of lay-offs is far more in an American company (that has been employing American workers traditionally) than it is in companies like Infosys and Wipro who are just setting up their base in America .
The letter is disturbing, to say the least. It is protectionism of the worst kind. In the earlier round, when Kerry and supporters were raising anti-offshoring slogans, they did not single out Indian companies as villains. Their wrath was equally against anyone who offshored.
This time around, by selectively targeting Indian firms, the senators have created an impression that the misuse of visas is done largely by Indian companies. This discrimination is protectionism that is two steps ahead of all that we have seen so far.
