COMMENTARY:
When I was in my MBA program, I attended classes with many foreign students who had come to the U.S. to obtain their education. I became friendly with a couple from Taiwan who were studying business management. They were kind enough to invite me to their house several times for authentic, home-cooked Chinese meals. Their intent was to obtain their MBA and return to Taiwan to seek work. Fate played a role when their elderly uncle in New York City asked them to stay and help him run his successful business. As he aged, he could not keep up with the demands of his business. My two friends graduated and reluctantly moved to New York and became successful themselves in running the business their uncle had started. Eventually, they hired more American employees to expand the business.
Another MBA friend was Raj, who was from India. He was studying computer sciences. He was so talented and dedicated that he rapidly became a professor’s research assistant, and eventually an adjunct/student professor. After graduation, a Silicon Valley tech giant recognized this computer whiz’s skills and rapidly made him a job offer. The last time I heard of Raj, he was a successful and valuable element of this company’s continued success.
In both of my friends’ cases, the companies that hired them helped sponsor a visa for them to work in the U.S. They all became positive elements in growing the U.S. economy and by helping expand businesses that hired Americans. This is why I was so concerned when Vice President J.D. Vance recently announced that the Trump Administration would be suspending
Microsoft and other companies from working with their foreign workers to allow them to apply for green cards in order to permanently live in the U.S.
Ironically, Vance’s announcement came shortly before President Trump awarded Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Nadella comes from a Hindu family in Hyderabad, India. He received his MS in Computer Science from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and his MBA from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business.
At around the same time as this announcement, the Department of Homeland Security did its own targeting of international students who want to study in the U.S. DHS is proposing that schools would have to pay a $70,000 fee for students that they allow to work in jobs associated with their field of study during their time in school. Vance further shored up the administration’s anti-international student stance by stating that schools of higher education such as Harvard, Stanford, and Yale are abusing the visa program that temporarily allows foreign students to come to the U.S. to study. Vance claims that foreign students who are granted work visas in the U.S. after they graduate become abused “indentured servants.” He also claims that these types of visa programs take jobs away from Americans.
I am certainly against abuse in visa programs for students and for foreign workers who are working in the U.S. I am fully in agreement that work visas should not be used to underpay, overwork, or generally mal-treat foreign workers. However, I personally have not heard of cases where this has occurred. I do know that there is a shortage of tech talent in the U.S. Mega corporations such as Microsoft solve this problem by recruiting talent from all over the world. In fact, the U.S. has been the greatest pilferer of foreign talent in the world. We have traditionally recruited foreign students, educated them, and then placed them in positions where they can add value to a company’s success. This has helped the U.S. compete in the highly competitive global tech market.
As a business owner, the last thing I want is government telling me whom I can and can’t hire. I need to make decisions pertaining to employees that will make my company prosper. I have hired foreign workers, who were formerly students at U.S. universities, and made them part of my workforce. I have yet to be disappointed by my decision to do this.
One negative effect of targeting companies such as Microsoft is that in today’s world, many high-tech workers can work from wherever in the world they wish. Modern computers, platforms, and the internet facilitate this. If the U.S. government starts targeting companies that are utilizing work visas to bring talent to the U.S., companies can simply allow many workers to work from abroad. This then precludes a job being created in the U.S., along with the talent associated with it. High-tech workers generally command high salaries, which are then used to purchase housing and all of the perks that a high salary brings. This is lost in our economy when we push these types of jobs out of the U.S.
There are justifiable cases where the U.S. government should get involved in policing the private sector. We certainly do not want an open market for the sale of nuclear weapons, for example. However, the U.S. is a democratic country that is founded on a capitalistic economic system. The government should not be telling private companies whom they should hire or how they should conduct their business.
When considering future expansion plans, do companies such as Microsoft opt for foreign locations to access foreign talent that they are being restricted from bringing to the U.S.? Could they also do this to avoid government interference in their hiring preferences? Would they opt to choose a more democratic, capitalistic country as opposed to the U.S., where a more authoritarian path is being pursued?
Jerry Pacheco is the president of the Border Industrial Association.
Jerry Pacheco's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of KRWG Public Media or NMSU.
You may send your local viewpoint submission to feedback@nmsu.edu