There's a growing debate in the US about hiring foreign Creatives. In many industries, particularly in the technology fields, a lot of innovation is being led by foreign talent. With the economy in the toilet, and with unemployment rising, there's an argument being made that there's no need to hire foreigners when there are so many Americans looking for work. On the other hand, a smart company hires the best talent it can, and if that talent is from outside the US, then so be it.
Currently bouncing around Congress is the "Stopping Trained in America PhDs From Leaving the Economy Act of 2009." Known as "the STAPLE Act," the idea behind it is something like stapling green cards to the diplomas of PhDs in science, technology, and engineering in order to give permanent residency to foreign students who earn those degrees. In the last couple decades so many American students shifted their focus away from science and technology and into finance and such (and we can see where THAT'S gotten us), and the slack has been taken up by foreign students coming here. For many years those students stayed here but more recently they've seen opportunities back home that weren't there before. Rather than continuing to make it difficult for them to stay, there are those in Congress who'd rather encourage them to stick around. Other discussions currently taking place involve the possibility of increasing the number of H1B visas for professionals, and figuring out what role work visas should play in free trade agreements.
At the other end of the spectrum are those who think we should take care of our own citizens first, making sure every qualified American has a job before hiring foreigners. Rather than increasing the quota of H1B visas, these visas should be suspended for now. The argument is that there are plenty of qualified people here, so the original argument for having H1B visas -- that Americans are studying finance instead of computer science and therefore we need people from overseas -- has gone away. We're already seeing this in the financial sector, where firms that receive federal bailout money have limits on hiring foreign workers, and there are plenty of people who say this concept should be expanded nationwide.
There's a certain logic to this, IF you view employment as something that should be provided rather than earned. For me, though, I tend to come down on the side of those who want to improve our immigration system and, in the process, make it easier for foreign Creatives to come and for foreign students to stay. US firms will do best if they hire the best talent, regardless of where that talent comes from. If Americans have trouble competing against foreign Creatives, then the Americans should make themselves more competitive. That's how capitalism is supposed to work.
Innovation and creativity are not limited by man-made national boundaries. Reducing our potential labor pool will hurt firms' performance and slow down the economic recovery. We can't just create Creatives overnight, so we should be looking for those who have the skills we need. Imposing new barriers to foreign Creatives and focusing on individual employment at the expense of the broader economy hurts everyone. It's better to bring people in and keep the jobs here than to outsource work to foreigners working for overseas companies. In the long term, welcoming those 85,000+ temporary workers every year can help, not hurt.
If you don't want to hire foreign workers, then don't. But taking that option away from others is a bad idea.
0 comments:
Post a Comment