You are correct that the companies who hire the majority of H-1Bs are actually outsourcing firms. You can see from the first graph and table at http://econdataus.com/h1binfo.htm that the top 11 companies in the number of H-1Bs approved in 2013 had significant outsourcing components in their business models. Eight of those 11 have their headquarters in India including the top two, Infosys and Tata. However, a number of those workers are contracted out to "the silicon valley usual suspects". I'm not sure that the data is available to determine where those workers are contracted out to.
By the way, your source at http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2013-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx does not seem to work. Regarding LCA's, however, I recently looked at the Labor Condition Applications that are required for each H-1B application (they are disclosed online) and posted the information at http://econdataus.com/lcainfo.htm . As you can see, very few are denied. Worse yet, the certified ones contain hundreds of errors that would seem to make them impossible to process correctly.
Regarding your contention that "Facebook, which doesn't even make the top 50 list", the table at http://www.computerworld.com/article/2489146/technology-law-... shows that they actually were number 25 with 337 H-1B's in 2013. That don't believe that counts any that they may be contracting from outsourcing firms. In any case, Zuckerberg may want to lift the cap so that he can catch up with the big boys.
Regarding Silicon Valley, I've posted tables and graphs at http://econdataus.com/h1bage.htm that show the huge number of non-citizens (likely H-1B's and some green card workers) working there. Also, it shows that the ages of non-citizens working in the industry spikes sharply in the 31 to 35 year range. This demand is likely motivated by the fact that young workers are cheaper, easier to take advantage of, and can be dumped for a new batch of young workers when their visas run out and/or they start standing up for themselves.
Hey, thanks for being the first well thought out response. I don't have much time right now but let me give a few quick thoughts regarding your analysis:
I don't know what you mean by the fact that the source doesn't work - the website works fine. Here's a google cache of the page: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://... And yeah, most LCAs are approved but not every approved LCA turns into a visa. The visa itself can be denied, or the company can decide to not file for a visa, and in this regard we don't know what we don't know in terms of how often this happens.
I am skeptical of the table you show from computerworld.com, but it is top /approvals/ not applications. Which points to the endemic issue even more of IT consulting firms doing the spray-and-pray approach of making a billion applications. But even then, facebook being #25 means nothing - they account for approx 1% or less of all applications, even when you count approvals only.
And again, 31 to 35 is not the young part of the software engineer group. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft etc have a HUGE presence in college career fairs, especially in top schools, where they poach 22 year old new graduates. That's the young end of the market likely to be willing to work for cheap, not the 30 year olds. And besides, there's exogenous effects - why would an old person move to a different country? Of course it's the youngsters that leave their country to move to silicon valley, the mecca of tech. You could hypothesize that, for example, youngsters in the US don't need to move as much because they already live near other tech centers like NY, Boston, Boulder, etc. Whereas when foreigners move to the US, they tend to move towards a place with a brand name like Silicon Valley.
PUMS is an interesting source for this - I think recently Web Developers are being classified separately in NAICS - have you accounted for that?
> I am skeptical of the table you show from computerworld.com, but it is top /approvals/ not applications. Which points to the endemic issue even more of IT consulting firms doing the spray-and-pray approach of making a billion applications. But even then, facebook being #25 means nothing - they account for approx 1% or less of all applications, even when you count approvals only.
As I said, however, I don't believe that the data shows how many H-1B contractors are be working at Facebook. I rechecked and the LCAs posted online only seem to list the employer and the city in which the employee will work. If they are contracted out, the company to which they are contracted is not shown. In any case, my problem with Zuckerberg is not the number of H-1Bs that he's hiring. It's that he's using the phony issue of a shortage in STEM skills to push for a higher cap. The great majority of commentaries at http://econdataus.com/skillsgap.html , including an editorial by Paul Krugman, suggest that the STEM skills gap is a myth. On that topic, an interesting article was just posted at http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/15/stem-gradu... .
> And again, 31 to 35 is not the young part of the software engineer group. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft etc have a HUGE presence in college career fairs, especially in top schools, where they poach 22 year old new graduates. That's the young end of the market likely to be willing to work for cheap, not the 30 year olds.
30-year old H-1B visa workers are beholden to the companies for which they work. This is one reason that companies like them. Also, I saw another part of that problem when I was working for a company that had to move out of Silicon Valley. They took just about all of their H-1B folks with them but laid off most of their employees who were citizens. Now, I didn't really mind myself since I wasn't planning on moving with them anyhow. But I believe that they kept their H-1B employees partially to be "nice", because the H-1B visas would be in jeopardy if their jobs ended. It made it more clear to me that, if you have two tiers of employees where one tier is beholden and the other is not, it will negatively affect all employees.
> PUMS is an interesting source for this - I think recently Web Developers are being classified separately in NAICS - have you accounted for that?
Yes, I added a list of the job classifications, including Web Developers, at http://econdataus.com/h1bage.htm . As you can see, they are included in the "All Computer Workers and Management" numbers. By the way, I did a quick check and there were 3,485 Web Developers in Silicon Valley in 2013 versus 62,600 Software Developers, Applications and System Software. In any event, the graphs show that the hiring of H-1Bs is much higher in Silicon Valley making the bias toward youth especially severe. I wrote a letter about the problem here to my representative and posted it at http://econdataus.com/h1bletter.htm . If you have any comments on that, feel free to share them.
By the way, your source at http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2013-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx does not seem to work. Regarding LCA's, however, I recently looked at the Labor Condition Applications that are required for each H-1B application (they are disclosed online) and posted the information at http://econdataus.com/lcainfo.htm . As you can see, very few are denied. Worse yet, the certified ones contain hundreds of errors that would seem to make them impossible to process correctly.
Regarding your contention that "Facebook, which doesn't even make the top 50 list", the table at http://www.computerworld.com/article/2489146/technology-law-... shows that they actually were number 25 with 337 H-1B's in 2013. That don't believe that counts any that they may be contracting from outsourcing firms. In any case, Zuckerberg may want to lift the cap so that he can catch up with the big boys.
Regarding Silicon Valley, I've posted tables and graphs at http://econdataus.com/h1bage.htm that show the huge number of non-citizens (likely H-1B's and some green card workers) working there. Also, it shows that the ages of non-citizens working in the industry spikes sharply in the 31 to 35 year range. This demand is likely motivated by the fact that young workers are cheaper, easier to take advantage of, and can be dumped for a new batch of young workers when their visas run out and/or they start standing up for themselves.