Calling employer abuse of federal visa programs for foreign workers "intolerable," the AFL-CIO is demanding that Congress reform the programs and increase federal regulation of companies that use them.
The resolution, approved at the Executive Council meeting in Chicago on Aug. 5, focuses on two visas, H-1B and L-1, that employers use to import more than 1 million so-called "guest workers" into the U.S. each year.
The Department of Professional Employees, the Communications Workers and one CWA local, Seattle-based WashTech, have been particularly active on the issue. The Professional and Technical Employees have also been lobbying on it.
"Employers, especially in high tech, are abusing temporary visa programs to allow hundreds of thousands of guest workers with no rights and no job security to take job opportunities in the U.S.," the AFL-CIO said.
That occurs even as their U.S. counterparts in high-tech firms "are unemployed and even being laid off."
The unions point out that firms such as IBM bring the foreign workers in, or plan to do so. They have U.S. workers train them for managerial or administrative jobs over years, and then return the foreign workers to their home countries, taking the U.S. jobs with them, and firing U.S. workers.
Other white-collar jobs are lost by export of call center and other positions overseas, WashTech, CWA and the AFL-CIO said. For example, Delta Airlines' reservation center is now in Manila.
"These programs were designed not to be legalization of the guest workers, but as a stopgap, with the clear understanding that the (foreign) workers would go home," says Paul Almeida, Department of Professional Employees president.
"But now those workers are being abused and oppressed by specific employers. They're economic prisoners," he adds.
The federation's resolution demands Congress reform the two programs to halt the abuses and curb the number of "guest workers" imported for the administrative and managerial jobs.
Almeida said he pushed the resolution through the council after first educating several union presidents that this was not an immigrants' rights issue. He said Congress may take up the issue in October. "We're going to monitor it and we'll be quick to mobilize the affiliates if there's any movement," he adds.
The federation's resolution set several objectives for revising the two visa programs. They include:
* Limiting H-1B visas to one non-renewable 3-year term.
* "Explicit prohibitions" on using H-1B workers to replace U.S. workers and provisions "to tie the entry of H-1Bs to U.S. labor market conditions to minimize the impact on professional workers."
* "Real safeguards" forcing employers to seek qualified U.S. workers for posts before importing H-1Bs, and legal requirements that employers pay any H-1Bs the prevailing wages in those jobs.
* Limiting H-1B applications to the original company that wants the workers. The AFL-CIO also wants provisions that H-1B workers laid off by the firm that hired them must return to their home countries within 90 days.
And it wants to ban firms from laying off H-1B workers who assert their rights, including the right to organize.
"The current system encourages H-1B workers to keep quiet or look for another job rather than file complaints about exploitation," the AFL-CIO said. Victimized H-1B workers should get whistleblower protection and the government should have the power to do random audits of companies that import H-1B workers.
To end the abuses of the L-1 workers, the federation backs legislation by Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Christopher Shays, R-Conn. It erects specific standards for firms to follow when they import those workers for managerial or administrative jobs.
The bill includes a prevailing wage requirement, a shorter L-1 visa period--it's now at least five years--and limits on the number of workers. It also would ban their use to displace U.S. workers, and would increase sanctions against lawbreakers.
"L-1s are being used to replace U.S. workers, who are often forced to train L-1 replacements before they themselves are laid off. Nothing in current law prevents this," the AFL-CIO said. And "foreign-owned replacement firms--also known as 'body shops'--are bringing in thousands of L-1 workers and then contracting them out to other employers," it adds.
Mark Gruenberg writes for Press Associates, Inc., news service. Used by permission.
Share
Calling employer abuse of federal visa programs for foreign workers “intolerable,” the AFL-CIO is demanding that Congress reform the programs and increase federal regulation of companies that use them.
The resolution, approved at the Executive Council meeting in Chicago on Aug. 5, focuses on two visas, H-1B and L-1, that employers use to import more than 1 million so-called “guest workers” into the U.S. each year.
The Department of Professional Employees, the Communications Workers and one CWA local, Seattle-based WashTech, have been particularly active on the issue. The Professional and Technical Employees have also been lobbying on it.
“Employers, especially in high tech, are abusing temporary visa programs to allow hundreds of thousands of guest workers with no rights and no job security to take job opportunities in the U.S.,” the AFL-CIO said.
That occurs even as their U.S. counterparts in high-tech firms “are unemployed and even being laid off.”
The unions point out that firms such as IBM bring the foreign workers in, or plan to do so. They have U.S. workers train them for managerial or administrative jobs over years, and then return the foreign workers to their home countries, taking the U.S. jobs with them, and firing U.S. workers.
Other white-collar jobs are lost by export of call center and other positions overseas, WashTech, CWA and the AFL-CIO said. For example, Delta Airlines’ reservation center is now in Manila.
“These programs were designed not to be legalization of the guest workers, but as a stopgap, with the clear understanding that the (foreign) workers would go home,” says Paul Almeida, Department of Professional Employees president.
“But now those workers are being abused and oppressed by specific employers. They’re economic prisoners,” he adds.
The federation’s resolution demands Congress reform the two programs to halt the abuses and curb the number of “guest workers” imported for the administrative and managerial jobs.
Almeida said he pushed the resolution through the council after first educating several union presidents that this was not an immigrants’ rights issue. He said Congress may take up the issue in October. “We’re going to monitor it and we’ll be quick to mobilize the affiliates if there’s any movement,” he adds.
The federation’s resolution set several objectives for revising the two visa programs. They include:
* Limiting H-1B visas to one non-renewable 3-year term.
* “Explicit prohibitions” on using H-1B workers to replace U.S. workers and provisions “to tie the entry of H-1Bs to U.S. labor market conditions to minimize the impact on professional workers.”
* “Real safeguards” forcing employers to seek qualified U.S. workers for posts before importing H-1Bs, and legal requirements that employers pay any H-1Bs the prevailing wages in those jobs.
* Limiting H-1B applications to the original company that wants the workers. The AFL-CIO also wants provisions that H-1B workers laid off by the firm that hired them must return to their home countries within 90 days.
And it wants to ban firms from laying off H-1B workers who assert their rights, including the right to organize.
“The current system encourages H-1B workers to keep quiet or look for another job rather than file complaints about exploitation,” the AFL-CIO said. Victimized H-1B workers should get whistleblower protection and the government should have the power to do random audits of companies that import H-1B workers.
To end the abuses of the L-1 workers, the federation backs legislation by Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Christopher Shays, R-Conn. It erects specific standards for firms to follow when they import those workers for managerial or administrative jobs.
The bill includes a prevailing wage requirement, a shorter L-1 visa period–it’s now at least five years–and limits on the number of workers. It also would ban their use to displace U.S. workers, and would increase sanctions against lawbreakers.
“L-1s are being used to replace U.S. workers, who are often forced to train L-1 replacements before they themselves are laid off. Nothing in current law prevents this,” the AFL-CIO said. And “foreign-owned replacement firms–also known as ‘body shops’–are bringing in thousands of L-1 workers and then contracting them out to other employers,” it adds.
Mark Gruenberg writes for Press Associates, Inc., news service. Used by permission.