Professionalism, The US Tech Sector, the H-1B Visa, and Employment Abuse

Background

The H-1B Visa is a renewable, lottery-based visa which allows US companies to hire foreign talent and sponsor a qualifying candidate's US residency for three to six years, with extensions beyond six years possible under qualified circumstances like a pending green card. The program is a descendant of the H program created by the Immigration and Nationality Act (1952) for temporary workers who can fill an unmet workforce need, with H-1 being designated for foreign workers with "distinguished merit and ability."

Over 70% of the 80,000+ H-1B petitions awarded each year go to applicants from India, with around 10% going to applicants from China, and the rest going to other applicants from various countries[1]. While these workers constitute less than 1% of the US workforce[2], their employment tends to be concentrated in STEM industries like technology, with Meta being recently cited in an ongoing lawsuit for excessive H-1B hiring as having 15% H-1B employees[3]. This threshold is significant because companies with an H-1B workforce of ≥15% are designated as "H-1B-dependent" by US regulators[4] in the interest of limiting preferential hiring of foreign over domestic talent. This follows a trend of greater scrutiny over the H-1B visa program within recent years over its necessity as well as worker abuses.

After expansions and amendments to the program in the 90's and 00's which allowed for greater numbers and flexibility of H-1B workers, there have been efforts to curtail the scope of the program, monitor abuses, and raise eligibility standards. These motivations have translated into policy changes, with the 2016 Trump administration prohibiting the hiring of H-1B workers with degrees that are deemed overly broad such as business administration[5], and the number of H-1B holders with a Master's degree rising from 31% in 2000 to 57% in 2021[6]. This trend has continued into 2025: bipartisan legislation has been proposed to reform the program over allegations of worker abuse[7], and in September, US regulators introduced a new $100,000 fee for companies which submit new H-1B visa petitions[8]. Although US President Trump has publicly supported the fee, he has also defended the United States's usage of foreign talent in skill-based industries, framing the US position on the issue as somewhat reluctant to reform. While some proponents of the H-1B fee argue that it disincentivizes US companies whose main priority is their bottom line from hiring cheaper foreign labor over qualified domestic candidates, critics argue that the fee reduces the US's ability to recruit elite talent. Statistically, this is a dubious claim given the small share of the workforce made up by H-1B Visa holders, and there are valid claims of worker abuses, both of visa holders and of domestic workers through wage theft, that have been documented.

Ethical quandaries can be inherent to the H-1B system due to an unequal share of power between workers and employers. Due to the scale at which the H-1B visa program operates, several classical ethical frameworks are a good fit for this issue, including utilitarianism, deontological ethics, and Rawls's Theory of Justice.

Trump Administration Policy

During Donald Trump’s presidency, H-1B visa policy became a focal point for discussions on ethics in immigration, labor, and business practices. The administration pursued several measures aimed at restricting the entry of foreign workers, particularly high-skilled employees, citing the need to protect American jobs and wages. The ethical considerations of these policies span multiple dimensions, including fairness, economic impact, and the balance between national interest and individual opportunity.

One significant aspect of Trump’s H-1B policy was the tightening of eligibility and documentation requirements. USCIS began issuing more Requests for Evidence (RFEs) and Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs), effectively increasing the administrative burden on applicants and employers.[9] Critics argued that these measures disproportionately targeted legitimate applicants while creating uncertainty for companies reliant on high-skilled labor.[10] From an ethical standpoint, this raises questions about procedural fairness: were applicants given a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate eligibility, or were bureaucratic hurdles used to systematically reduce visa approvals? The policies highlighted a tension between administrative rigor and equitable treatment of foreign workers.

Another ethically salient feature was the administration’s shift toward wage-based prioritization of H-1B applications. This approach favored higher-paid applicants on the assumption that such positions reflected more specialized skills. While potentially defensible on meritocratic grounds, it risked disadvantaging younger workers or specialists in emerging fields where wages remain comparatively low. Ethical evaluation must consider whether a system that indirectly penalizes lower-paid experts is justified or whether it restricts opportunity without clear public benefit.

The Trump-era policies also intersected with questions of corporate ethics. Tech companies argued that restrictions harmed innovation and reduced access to critical global talent, potentially slowing technological advancement.[11] Some analysis suggested that limiting foreign labor could indirectly impact consumers and broader economic competitiveness.[12] This raises a moral tension between protecting domestic labor and sustaining national technological progress.

Concerns also emerged regarding transparency and consistency in policy application. Reports indicated that enforcement varied by region, industry, or employer size, suggesting the possibility of unequal treatment stemming from administrative discretion.[13] Such inconsistency challenges ethical principles of fairness and predictability, both essential to good governance.

In summary, ethical analysis of Donald Trump’s H-1B visa policies must weigh the goal of protecting domestic workers against the consequences for foreign applicants, employers, and innovation. The central ethical questions involve procedural fairness, equitable access, and the broader societal outcomes of restricting high-skilled immigration.

Impacts on the Tech Industry

A driving, if dysfunctional, incentive for US tech corporations to hire H-1B employees is the potential reduction in hiring costs. The Department of Labor (DOL) requires employers to attest that H-1B employees are being paid "the actual wage paid by the employer to other workers with similar experience and qualifications for the job in question, or the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment – whichever is greater."[14] However, employers can exploit the DOL's 4-tiered wage level scale to reclassify mid-career positions as entry level, thus paying a lower "prevailing wage."[15] In practice, this classification goes unchallenged by regulators unless a lawsuit or complaint is filed by an employee.[15] According to a 2020 analysis by the Economic Policy Institute, 60% of H1-B visas were certified at the Level 1 wage (17th percentile) or the Level 2 wage (34th percentile) [16]. Therefore, contrary to the prevailing wage requirement from the DOL, the majority of H1-B visas were certified at below the median wage (50th percentile).

In 2021, Ralph Billington, Michael Aceves, and Sharon Dorman filed a qui tam lawsuit against HCL Technologies, alleging HCL underpaid their H1-B employees using this scheme to reduce their tax obligations, thus defrauding the United States.[17] Court documents revealed that, on average, H1-B employees were being paid nearly 47% less than their US-hired counterparts for identical roles.[18]. Both the district court and an appellate court dismissed all claims as there was insufficient evidence to show HCL avoided tax obligations through this scheme [17].

Abuse of the H-1B program has an outsized impact on the tech industry. In 2025, the top 4 US companies by approved H-1B petitions were Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google -- all with denial rates ≤ 1% [19]. And in 2011, two-thirds of college educated workers under 30 in IT were guest workers (which includes, among others, those in the H-1B program) [20]. In a collection of statements by affected American tech workers, the prevailing sentiment was that the H-1B program has been misused to replace Americans with cheaper foreign labor (sometimes forcing Americans to train their H-1B replacements) and to depress their market rate salaries. One computer scientist, Vivian Hsiung, wrote, "As I gained more experience in my specialty area, my wage went lower. For example, in 2008, I was making $70 an hour on W2, but in 2015 and 2017, I was only making $50 hourly rate on W2 - this is the result of wage suppression via H1B import. As real data demonstrated that H1B were hired at a lower rate and they undercut American workers - domestic workers are either displaced by cheaper H1B workers or deprived of the job opportunities" [21]. Hsiung's anecdote is just one of many demonstrating how the misuse of the H1-B program has been weaponized against skilled Americans.

Richard Trumka, then President of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the largest federation of unions in the US, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2015 to argue for necessary reforms to protect skilled American workers (such as those in the tech industry) [22]. Trumka claimed that sponsors can fire guest employees at will by simply terminating their visas, and that less than 10% of firms sponsor their employees for green card status, essentially reducing these guest workers to a "disposable workforce" [22] He cited H1-B workers' low job mobility and inability to self-petition for legal permanent resident (green card) status as the primary vehicles for abuse [22]. Without the ability to readily change employers, H1-B workers face a daunting power imbalance which erodes their bargaining power and strengthens the position of corporations.

References

• ↑ U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2020). H-1B Authorized-to-Work Population Estimate. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/USCIS%20H-1B%20Authorized%20to%20Work%20Report.pdf
• ↑ U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2025). Characteristics of H-1B Specialty Occupation Workers: Fiscal Year 2024 annual report to Congress, October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2024. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/ola_signed_h1b_characteristics_congressional_report_FY24.pdf
• ↑ Wiessner, D. (2025, February 25). Meta must face lawsuit claiming it prefers cheaper foreign workers. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/legal/meta-must-face-lawsuit-claiming-it-prefers-cheaper-foreign-workers-2025-02-25/
• ↑ U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Fact Sheet #62C: H-1B-Dependent Employer. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/62c-h1b-dependent-employer
• ↑ Murthy, M. (2018, November 19). Broad education requirements can result in H-1B denials. https://www.murthy.com/2018/11/19/broad-education-requirements-can-result-in-h1b-denials/
• ↑ Pew Research Center. (2025, March 4). What we know about the U.S. H-1B visa program. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/03/04/what-we-know-about-the-us-h-1b-visa-program/
• ↑ Senate Judiciary Committee; Grassley, C.; Durbin, D. (2025, September 29). Grassley, Durbin propose bipartisan H-1B and L-1 visa reforms to protect American workers and stop outsourcing jobs. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-durbin-propose-bipartisan-h-1b-and-l-1-visa-reforms-to-protect-american-workers-and-stop-outsourcing-jobs
• ↑ U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2025, September 21). H-1B FAQ – Alert: Restriction on entry of certain nonimmigrant workers. https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/h-1b-faq
• ↑ National Foundation for American Policy. “H-1B Denials and Requests for Evidence Increase Under the Trump Administration” (2018). https://nfap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/H-1B-Denial-and-RFE-Increase.NFAP-Policy-Brief.July-2018.pdf
• ↑ Immigration Law Group. “H-1B RFEs and Denials Increase Under the Trump Administration” (2018). https://www.immigrationlawgroup.net/en/h1b-rfes-and-denials-increase-under-the-trump-administration
• ↑ CNBC. “Trump’s H-1B Visa Changes Could Kneecap Startups, Experts Say” (2025). https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/24/trumps-h-1b-visa-changes-could-kneecap-startups-experts-say.html
• ↑ AInvest News. “Impact of Trump’s H-1B Visa Overhaul on Tech Stocks” (2025). https://www.ainvest.com/news/impact-trump-1b-visa-overhaul-tech-stocks-2509
• ↑ Multiple Cities Policy Report. “Curbing Legal Immigration: The Administration’s Development of Hurdles Under the H-1B Visa Program” (2018). https://www.multiplecities.org/home/2018/9/25/curbing-legal-immigration-the-administrations-development-of-hurdles-under-the-h-1b-visa-program
• ↑ "H-1B Program". DOL. Retrieved 2025-12-08.
• ↑ a b "H-1B visa needs reform to make it fairer to migrant and American workers". Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved 2025-12-08.
• ↑ "H-1B visas and prevailing wage levels: A majority of H-1B employers—including major U.S. tech firms—use the program to pay migrant workers well below market wages". Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved 2025-12-13.
• ↑ a b "United States ex rel. Billington v. HCL Techs. Ltd., No. 22-1854 (2d Cir. 2025)" (in en). Justia Law. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/22-1854/22-1854-2025-01-23.html.
• ↑ "New evidence of widespread wage theft in the H-1B visa program: Corporate document reveals how tech firms ignore the law and systematically rob migrant workers". Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved 2025-12-08.
• ↑ Anderson, Stuart (November 17, 2025). "Top U.S. Technology Companies Dominate H-1B Visa List In 2025". Forbes.
• ↑ "Current and proposed high-skilled guestworker policies discourage STEM students and grads from entering IT". Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved 2025-12-13.
• ↑ Statements by Affected Americans. (n.d.). US House of Representatives. https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU01/20210713/112814/HMTG-117-JU01-20210713-SD031.pdf
• ↑ a b c Immigration Reforms Needed to Protect Skilled American Workers, Senate Judiciary Committee, Cong. (2015, March 17). (Testimony of Richard Trumka). https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Trumka%20Testimony.pdf

Where this page came from

This page was imported from Wikibooks. From “Professionalism” on Wikibooks, by its contributors, under CC BY-SA 4.0. Changed here: set as a page; navigation and edit links left out; each image under its own licence, credited in its caption.

Nobody has written it yet — it is the source material at a new address, which is why search engines are asked to skip it and why no one earns from it. It is up for grabs: take it on, and it is yours to rewrite and to earn from.