6 ms·

Doesn't this violate anti-discrimination laws? It seems like this discriminates against US citizens (discrimination by national origin).

davewritescode 4y ago
How? You get severance until March the only difference between US and non-US employees is the technically the date that employment ends. Everyone is paid through March anyway.
bhouser 4y ago
How is it discrimination if they set the termination date for ALL employees to March 1, 2023?
teaearlgraycold 4y ago
By that logic is the existence of visa programs discrimination by national origin?
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  No, because the employer must prove their are no legal residents in the US that are eligible for the job.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - howinteresting 4y ago
    This is a common myth but is not true for H-1B visas. It is true for EB2 and EB3 green cards, however.
    - sidewndr46 4y ago
      As part of the LCA the employer must attest there is no strike or lockout, that the salary of similarly employed workers is not affected, & that the job application must be provided to workers already at the company. So no, you can't just threaten to replace all your employees with H1-B visa holders.
      - howinteresting 4y ago
        Right, but that's not "their [sic] are no legal residents in the US that are eligible for the job". That's the PERM process.
        sidewndr46 4y ago
        Damn you are dense. It is on the employer to prove they are not affecting the wages of US legal residents as part of the LCA. Bringing in foreign labor to a market implicitly lowers the wages of those workers. That is how markets work. Thus, there must be absolutely 0 residents already capable of performing the job. Otherwise the LCA is fraudulent. The only other possibility would be the employer is bringing in foreign labor to pay them a premium over legal residents. Which obviously no one does.
        dang 4y ago
        Breaking the site guidelines like that will get you banned here. Please don't do it again. Your account would be fine without that first sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        renewiltord 4y ago
        This advice is incongruent with that of any lawyer I have consulted on the subject (both from the perspective of an employer and as an employee). To those interested in the subject, you'll have a more accurate picture of the current legal climate from a lawyer. In my experience, it will be very different from this user's legal determination of whether one must prove the existence of 0 US residents for the job. As an employer, USCIS has never required this proof from us for a H-1B.
        vore 4y ago
        Just as a clarification, the poster is talking about PERM for EB-2 and EB-3 visas which do kind of have those requirements, not H-1B.
        4y ago
- howinteresting 4y ago
  No. What is discrimination by national origin is the fact that employment-based green cards have a quota by country of birth, without any adjustment for the country's population. However, the American legal system accepts that kind of discrimination by national origin, because it doesn't fall under the Civil Rights Act.
kzrdude 4y ago
That question reminds me of those equality vs equity pictures. I'm not sure I even agree with those definitions, but it's a commonly spread explanation. https://www.marinhhs.org/sites/default/files/boards/general/equality_v._equity_04_05_2021.pdf https://www.marinhhs.org/sites/default/files/boards/general/... So one question is then, which view does a court take?
- gizmo686 4y ago
  Notably, DoorDash is providing the benefit equally to all fired employees [0]. [0] At least those working within the US.
- djur 4y ago
  This "benefit" is available to everyone laid off. It's not discriminatory just because some people don't need it. Otherwise offering free bicycle storage would be discriminatory to people who bus to work, and offering free bus passes would be discriminatory to cyclists.
  - pc86 4y ago
    We would be well served to be a little more discriminatory against cyclists.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
happygolucky_in 4y ago
While US citizens can take their time and find another job while also receive unemployment benefits, someone on H1 visa has to technically leave the country as soon as possible.A laid off person on H1 cannot remain unemployed and continue to remain in the country. This is particularly hard on those with families, many living in this country for 10+ years, with school going kids. Many have been waiting for years to get a green card. This is a very kind gesture by the employer. Hope more employers do this.
sidewndr46 4y ago
It appears this has been done for all employees. So no in this case.
syzarian 4y ago
Discrimination laws apply to protected classes. Visa holders are not a protected class.
nsonha 4y ago
I guess they should also kick US citizen employees out of the country by March 1?
schon 4y ago
It doesn't mean they are paid until then... it just says your last day as an employee is that date, giving them time to look for other jobs. Don't confuse it with being paid to do nothing because that isn't the case.
minhazm 4y ago
It doesn't say the end date is only for visa holders. It's just saying that visa holders will particularly benefit from it.

davewritescode 4y ago

How? You get severance until March the only difference between US and non-US employees is the technically the date that employment ends. Everyone is paid through March anyway.

bhouser 4y ago

How is it discrimination if they set the termination date for ALL employees to March 1, 2023?

teaearlgraycold 4y ago

By that logic is the existence of visa programs discrimination by national origin?

sidewndr46 4y ago
No, because the employer must prove their are no legal residents in the US that are eligible for the job.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- howinteresting 4y ago
  This is a common myth but is not true for H-1B visas. It is true for EB2 and EB3 green cards, however.
  - sidewndr46 4y ago
    As part of the LCA the employer must attest there is no strike or lockout, that the salary of similarly employed workers is not affected, & that the job application must be provided to workers already at the company. So no, you can't just threaten to replace all your employees with H1-B visa holders.
    - howinteresting 4y ago
      Right, but that's not "their [sic] are no legal residents in the US that are eligible for the job". That's the PERM process.
      - sidewndr46 4y ago
        Damn you are dense. It is on the employer to prove they are not affecting the wages of US legal residents as part of the LCA. Bringing in foreign labor to a market implicitly lowers the wages of those workers. That is how markets work. Thus, there must be absolutely 0 residents already capable of performing the job. Otherwise the LCA is fraudulent. The only other possibility would be the employer is bringing in foreign labor to pay them a premium over legal residents. Which obviously no one does.
        dang 4y ago
        Breaking the site guidelines like that will get you banned here. Please don't do it again. Your account would be fine without that first sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        renewiltord 4y ago
        This advice is incongruent with that of any lawyer I have consulted on the subject (both from the perspective of an employer and as an employee). To those interested in the subject, you'll have a more accurate picture of the current legal climate from a lawyer. In my experience, it will be very different from this user's legal determination of whether one must prove the existence of 0 US residents for the job. As an employer, USCIS has never required this proof from us for a H-1B.
        vore 4y ago
        Just as a clarification, the poster is talking about PERM for EB-2 and EB-3 visas which do kind of have those requirements, not H-1B.
        4y ago
howinteresting 4y ago
No. What is discrimination by national origin is the fact that employment-based green cards have a quota by country of birth, without any adjustment for the country's population. However, the American legal system accepts that kind of discrimination by national origin, because it doesn't fall under the Civil Rights Act.

kzrdude 4y ago

That question reminds me of those equality vs equity pictures. I'm not sure I even agree with those definitions, but it's a commonly spread explanation. https://www.marinhhs.org/sites/default/files/boards/general/equality_v._equity_04_05_2021.pdf https://www.marinhhs.org/sites/default/files/boards/general/... So one question is then, which view does a court take?

gizmo686 4y ago
Notably, DoorDash is providing the benefit equally to all fired employees [0]. [0] At least those working within the US.
djur 4y ago
This "benefit" is available to everyone laid off. It's not discriminatory just because some people don't need it. Otherwise offering free bicycle storage would be discriminatory to people who bus to work, and offering free bus passes would be discriminatory to cyclists.
- pc86 4y ago
  We would be well served to be a little more discriminatory against cyclists.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

happygolucky_in 4y ago

While US citizens can take their time and find another job while also receive unemployment benefits, someone on H1 visa has to technically leave the country as soon as possible.A laid off person on H1 cannot remain unemployed and continue to remain in the country. This is particularly hard on those with families, many living in this country for 10+ years, with school going kids. Many have been waiting for years to get a green card. This is a very kind gesture by the employer. Hope more employers do this.

sidewndr46 4y ago

It appears this has been done for all employees. So no in this case.

syzarian 4y ago

Discrimination laws apply to protected classes. Visa holders are not a protected class.

nsonha 4y ago

I guess they should also kick US citizen employees out of the country by March 1?

schon 4y ago

It doesn't mean they are paid until then... it just says your last day as an employee is that date, giving them time to look for other jobs. Don't confuse it with being paid to do nothing because that isn't the case.

minhazm 4y ago

It doesn't say the end date is only for visa holders. It's just saying that visa holders will particularly benefit from it.