|
“Most of the companies that sponsor a large number of visas are publicly listed and ethically managed companies. Visa abuse, if any, would tend to be lesser in such organizations as compared to other small, fly-by-night operators,” said Nasscom.
Nasscom is not the only one that came up in support of the Indian firms. Bloggers — the powerful new-age community that often gives a peep into the real-world happenings — argued that the Senators were targeting not all outsourcing firms, but had singled out the Indians.
Of the top 20 highest users of H-1Bs in 2006, only nine companies were Indian and 11 American, including Microsoft (third-highest user of these visas), IBM (eighth), Oracle (ninth), Deloitte & Touche (12th), Cisco (13th), Intel (14th), Ernst & Young (16th), Motorola (18th) and Deloitte Consulting (20th). These 11 also include two U.S.-headquartered companies of Indian origin: Cognizant (sixth) and HCL America (11th). But none of the American firms were questioned on their H-1B visa usage!
Most of the larger Indian companies charged with visa misuse, when contacted declined to comment. Wipro’s spokesperson sent an email reply to our inquiry saying, “Wipro would not like to comment on this issue.” “[The issue was] discussed between Nasscom and the IT companies in India, and [we] finally came to a conclusion that Nasscom would reply on behalf of all the companies,” said Tech Mahindra’s spokesperson. Patni said its spokespersons were traveling and Infosys declined to comment, while TCS chose to not even acknowledge our mail inquiry.
The smaller companies whose names don’t appear on the Senator’s list were open to talking to us, and came out in defense of the industry. “Since sending a worker to the U.S. on visa is more expensive than operating from India, why would any company risk their growth by sending more people onsite?” asks Iti Kumar, Director HR, GlobalLogic, an India-based IT-services firm. “It is a win-win scenario for Indian service providers, so it is not in our [Indian companies] interest to do so [violate visa regulations].”
| Company |
No. of L-1 Visas, 2006 |
| Tata Consultancy Services |
4,887 |
| Cognizant Tech Solutions |
3,520 |
| IBM |
1,237 |
| Satyam Computer Services |
950 |
| Wipro |
839 |
| HCL America |
511 |
| Deloitte & Touche LLP/Deloitte Consulting |
512 |
| Patni Computer Systems |
440 |
| Intel |
392 |
| Kanbay |
329 |
| Honeywell International |
320 |
| HP |
316 |
| Infosys Tech |
294 |
| Accenture |
291 |
| Caritor |
231 |
| Schlumberger Technology |
214 |
| Oracle USA |
176 |
| Syntel |
171 |
| PricewaterhouseCoopers |
168 |
| Microsoft |
168 |
Smaller Companies: The Culprits?
Nasscom putting the blame on “smaller” companies hasn’t gone down too well with such firms, with some alleging that the association is standing up for the large companies because they are its key financiers. In fact, four of the nine firms charged (Infosys, TCS, Wipro and i-Flex) have representations in Nasscom’s Executive Council.
Moreover, H-1B visas are not easy to come by, and companies have to go through stringent processes when applying for these visas for their staff. So, how can “fly-by-night” operators even get these visas, let alone misuse them, they ask?
Also, the number of visas that these companies get is insignificant compared to what the biggies get. Global Services was not able to get the number of H-1B visas allocated to “small” companies, but we did speak to a few mid-sized companies to get an estimate of the number of such visas they have. Zensar, a 4,000 people mid-sized company with revenue of $135 million, for instance, has less than a 100 H-1Bs for 2007 while GlobalLogic, another mid-sized company with a staff of 1,700, has about 25 such visas. Compare this to Infosys’ 4,908 and Wipro’s 4,003 H-1B allocation for 2006. Neither Zensar nor GlobalLogic figure in the list of the top 200 H-1B visa holders for 2006.
The L-1 Loophole
But that does not mean that there is no misuse of these non-immigrant visas. When companies can’t get sufficient H-1Bs or if they exhaust their quotas, they often get their staff to the U.S. on L-1 visas. Moreover, unlike the H-1B program, the L-1 visa has neither a cap to it nor a salary restriction, making it an easy loophole to bring cheap labor into the country. In fact, jokes have been made that the “L” in L-1 stands for “loophole!”
Moreover, L-1s are meant for managers and workers with specialized knowledge not available in the firm’s U.S. office; programmers, available in abundance in the U.S., do not qualify for the L scheme.
“If companies can’t get the H-1B visas, they use the L-1 visa,” says Kumar of GlobalLogic. “Or if their H-1Bs get exhausted, they turn to the L-1.”
This is not something that Congress does not know. In fact, closing L-1 loopholes has been a focus of high-skill immigration-policy reform discussions. Since the L visa allows companies to transfer “limitless” workers into the U.S., Senators Durbin and Grassley have vowed to continue their investigation into the “blanket” L-visa policy.
|
