IMHO

I felt a little bit confused abt what this article claims. As far as I know
even with all this disadvantages pointed here the IT industry is one of the
most wanted professions that the americans like to do. Isn't that a little
bit contradictory? I mean... in this and others forums is VERY common read
messages from people stating that they DO want to make a shift in their careers
to the IT industry, looking for entry positions or even students preparing
themselves to make the best jump into the real world just after leaving the
academia.

Despite all the terrible future that is waiting for us (kidding) I think
that one of the primary motivations to pursue a career in IT is precisely
the constant challenge and learning proccess that make us feel happy!, that
make us dont get bored and love our daily activity with enthusiasm and hope,
not with fear and doom.

Even more, a lot fo people is looking for a job in IT because the average
salaries are much better than in other industries, so, far from feel unfortunate
or pressed by the nature of this industry I think that we should feel happy
to be part of a constant move and innovation.

I dont want to sound rude or agressive but, come on! this industry can wait
for the slow adopters either for the sedentary people, think about it, this
industry is what it is today precisely for people that are always thinking
in new stuff, new technologies, new languages and IT is taking precedence
over almost any other industry all over the world.

I'm not saying that re-training or 'recycling programmers' are bad ideas
and I know that some day maybe I'll be less competitive and fast than young
people to learn new things but what I'm trying to say is let's face it this
is not gonna change, in fact, I think this gonna be 'worst' everytime.


Miguel Angel

Miguel,

Are you referring to the URL I posted? If so, you need to understand that
the article is pointing out what many people (including IT workers) don't
know about the IT industry. For example, I constantly read articles with
topics such as "we need to get more young people interested in computer science".
The problem is that there are bunch of recent computer graduates who have
even have earned a certification in Java programming from SUN, yet they still
can't find an entry-level job after searching for months! If you don't believe
me then just say so and I will post the URLs to a few Java forums and let
you decide for yourself whether what I am telling is correct or not.

I think that you may need to re-read the article since it has a lot to say
about how much of the IT industry really works. Re-training experienced IT
workers is only a small aspect of what that particular article was talking
about.

There are a lot of barriers and catch-22's in the IT industry. The bottom
line is that the IT industry is still a young and very dysfunctional field.


Btw, working in IT is much more than just knowing the latest and greatest
technologies. If you require further clarification on something that the
article discussed just ask a specific question and I am sure somebody here
will answer your question in greater detail.


"Miguel Angel Gonzalez" <miguelangelglz@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Miguel Angel Gonzalez" <miguelangelglz@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>As far as I know even with all this disadvantages pointed here the IT industry
is one of the most wanted professions that the americans like to do. Isn't
that a little bit contradictory? I mean... in this and others forums is VERY
common read messages from people stating that they DO want to make a shift
in their careers to the IT industry, looking for entry positions or even
students preparing themselves to make the best jump into the real world just
after leaving the academia.<<

Just because people WANT to get in doesn't mean they will. I cannot tell
you how many posts I have read from people who have spent THOUSANDS of dollars
on certifications or YEARS acquiring bachelor's degrees and have not been
able to find a job even a year later. The article pointed out the hypocrisy
of companies forever whining they can't get people when there are eager,
willing people all around.


I try not to discourage people when they say they want to get into IT because,
of course, some people do get in thru luck or perseverance. But a lot of
the people diligently acquiring certifications now will never get into the
IT field or will not progress past the help desk.

Miguel:

"Miguel Angel Gonzalez" <miguelangelglz@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I felt a little bit confused abt what this article claims. As far as I know
>even with all this disadvantages pointed here the IT industry is one of
the
>most wanted professions that the americans like to do.

Well, I don't know about that! When they make a successful prime-time T.V.
drama about programmers, then we can talk! I would say that doctors and
lawyers are still the big "prestige" professions here in the U.S.

Isn't that a little
>bit contradictory? I mean... in this and others forums is VERY common read
>messages from people stating that they DO want to make a shift in their
careers
>to the IT industry, looking for entry positions or even students preparing
>themselves to make the best jump into the real world just after leaving
the
>academia.
>

Well, I think there is a big difference between what people's perception
about the IT industry is, and what the reality is. If you believe the media,
a job in IT is a sure ticket to wealth with all of the supposed ".com millionaires"
and their pre-IPO stock options. Plus, with the much hyped shortage of workers,
there are supposedly plenty of these "get rich quick" jobs just waiting for
you out there. I think some people who want to get into the field only do
so because of all this hype.

>Despite all the terrible future that is waiting for us (kidding) I think
>that one of the primary motivations to pursue a career in IT is precisely
>the constant challenge and learning proccess that make us feel happy!, that
>make us dont get bored and love our daily activity with enthusiasm and hope,
>not with fear and doom.
>
>Even more, a lot fo people is looking for a job in IT because the average
>salaries are much better than in other industries, so, far from feel unfortunate
>or pressed by the nature of this industry I think that we should feel happy
>to be part of a constant move and innovation.
>

I don't like to discourage people from going into the field, but in my opinion,
if you want to work in this field, or in any field, you have to "love your
daily activity with enthusiasm and hope." I will go a step further and say
that you not only have to love what you do, but you have to have an aptitude
for it. Money is also a nice thing, but there are lots of ways in this world
to make money. You shouldn't base your career choice on money alone. I
love baseball, and I'd love to be able to make a living playing it, but the
reality is that I am not good enough at it to make that possible.

I think some people really underestimate the type of skill and aptitude it
takes to be a software developer. It's just not something that everyone
is going to be good at. It's just a fact of life.

>I dont want to sound rude or agressive but, come on! this industry can wait
>for the slow adopters either for the sedentary people, think about it, this
>industry is what it is today precisely for people that are always thinking
>in new stuff, new technologies, new languages and IT is taking precedence
>over almost any other industry all over the world.
>

You don't sound rude. I agree with you to a certain extent. In IT (or in
any field for that matter), you need to keep up with the latest developments.
That's just common sense. However, I think some employers put too much
emphasis on specific tools, rather than broad knowledge and experience.
Take the mainframe programmer who wants to transition to client-server or
web technolgies. Probably that mainframe progammer has X years of experience
developing software for mission-critical production systems. That's great
experience to have on any project. However, some people for some reason
think that the X year veteran of the trenches is somebody LESS valuable than
a newly-minted college graduate with a few classes in the latest language
and exactly ZERO years of real-world seasoning. Personally, I think that's
terribly insulting to the X year veteran, and it's idiotic from a business
standpoint. If I were a CEO, and my H.R. V.P. told me that somehow somebody
with ZERO years experience was a more valuable employee than an X year veteran,
I'd ask them what they were smoking!

>I'm not saying that re-training or 'recycling programmers' are bad ideas
>and I know that some day maybe I'll be less competitive and fast than young
>people to learn new things but what I'm trying to say is let's face it this
>is not gonna change, in fact, I think this gonna be 'worst' everytime.
>
>
>Miguel Angel

Well, I think that the "smart" companies will realize that "recycling" programmers
can make good business sense, and the "not-so-smart" companies will probably
be out of business. So, just based upon pure capitalistic survival of the
fittest, it will change.

> Just because people WANT to get in doesn't mean they will. I cannot tell
> you how many posts I have read from people who have spent THOUSANDS of
dollars
> on certifications or YEARS acquiring bachelor's degrees and have not been
> able to find a job even a year later. The article pointed out the
hypocrisy
> of companies forever whining they can't get people when there are eager,
> willing people all around.

Hate to break the news, but a CS degree, a doctorate and 57 certifications
do not automagically turn you into a capable developer. All that means is
you can read and write. Companies *today* I believe are strengthening their
filters, so they are of course finding less people. That's because there's a
shortage of capable, professional developers. Not a shortage of "IT
personnel".

Posts like this (and from a few other people in this forum) reflect the sad
fact that so many people thought they could get a 75K+ salary straight out
of school if they were able to spell "HTML". The reality --thank heavens--
is very different. The media and IT industry both have a lot of blame in
this. But now all those companies that hired "programmers" and "web
designers" and "content managers" are getting rid of the fluff and keeping
the quality, and rightly so. All this can only benefit you if you are in a
position of strength in your career or chosen area of professional
development. That is, if you know what you're doing.

It's called "natural selection".

____________
Klaus

You pretty much missed my point entirely. The other post by "David K" has
already clarified the point. I'm not suggesting anyone who wants in should
get in, and I have come across many highly intelligent people that just did
not have the right "thought process" to do well in programming.

However, the original post by Mr. Gonzalez indicated that there can't be
anything wrong with the IT industry because so many people want to get in.
(a non sequiter in my opinion.) He then goes on to characterize experienced
programmers who are getting blocked in their careers as "slow adopters",
"sedentary", "less competitive" and generally implied we're hypocrites for
suggesting the current approach to hiring is ill-advised. I don't think
he intended to be rude but, yes, I consider those comments insulting as he
has NO IDEA what many of us have gone thru to try and get onto new projects
and new technologies.

"Klaus H. Probst" <kprobst@vbbox.com> wrote:
>Hate to break the news, but a CS degree, a doctorate and 57 certifications
>do not automagically turn you into a capable developer. All that means is
>you can read and write.

Klaus,

While I agree that those things don't "automagically" make you a good developer,
they do mean that you CAN do more than read and write. To suggest otherwise
is just plain crazy.

Companies *today* I believe are strengthening their
>filters, so they are of course finding less people. That's because there's
a
>shortage of capable, professional developers. Not a shortage of "IT
>personnel".
>

I think you are missing the point. Posters aren't complaining that companies
are strengthing their standards to weed out weak candidates. I don't have
a problem with that. What I have a problem with is that these "standards"
are also weeding out a lot of "capable, professional developers."

>Posts like this (and from a few other people in this forum) reflect the
sad
>fact that so many people thought they could get a 75K+ salary straight out
>of school if they were able to spell "HTML". The reality --thank heavens--
>is very different. The media and IT industry both have a lot of blame in
>this. But now all those companies that hired "programmers" and "web
>designers" and "content managers" are getting rid of the fluff and keeping
>the quality, and rightly so. All this can only benefit you if you are in
a
>position of strength in your career or chosen area of professional
>development. That is, if you know what you're doing.
>

I think the problem that posters like myself, Elena, etc are complaining
about is that the people doing the hiring in I.T. don't understand what it
takes to be a "good" programmer. When you want to hire somebody, first you
need to ask yourself what qualities does a candidate need to possess in order
to succeed in this position and at this company. Once you have identified
these qualities, you need to gear the selection process so you identify candidates
who possess those qualities. It's really not rocket science.

The reality is that the qualities that make one sucessful in software development
are not the qualities that are being used to select candidates. Many times
this results in what you just described. Companies hire somebody just because
they have the letters "HTML" or "VB" or "XML" or <insert-the-technology-flavor-of-the-week-here>
on their resume. Meanwhile, candidates who would make much better developers
are passed over because they don't have the "magic letters" on their resume.
That sort of hiring practice doesn't produce the best candidates.

The thing which concerns me the most is the effect that this has on the software
industry as a whole. Because employers reward work experience in specific
tools, workers are encouraged to always try to apply the latest tools to
problems, even if the tools aren't the best ones for the job, because they
need the "work experience" on their resume. Workers are discouraged from
maintaining working systems for fear of becoming obsolete supporting "legacy
code". Workers are encouraged to "hop" from one job to another in order
to keep their resumes current. Workers are discouraged from sticking with
projects long term. All these things have an effect on business and the
bottom line. It costs a lot of time and money to hire somebody and bring
them up to speed on a project. It costs a lot of time and money to scrap
working systems and replace them just because the developers want to keep
their skills current. Unfortunately, it seems like this is exactly the atmosphere
that employers are cultivating through their hiring "filters".

>It's called "natural selection".
>

I agree. Companies which engage in "sub-optimal" hiring practices are probably
the same ones that are closing their doors.

I think that all we have different ways to see or approaches abt this issue.
Everything depends on the side of the coin you are. But I'd like to point
some facts.

195,000 H1B holders SHOULD not be blamed abt this problem with the IT industry
in USA, i mean, assuming that all the H1B holders get a job in USA (what
is not true or real), I DO NOT believe this gonna be take out the american
programmers or IT pro's their positions as the article states.

The solution (or part of it) IS NOT reducing the H1B quota as this article
claims, personally I found a litte bit of racism underneath and fear to free
competence. (Strange if you take in account that the author is married with
an assian immigrant!)

We must understand that this industry (IT), like many others, is here to
DO BUSINESS AND MONEY, like it or not to us, so they're finding their ways
to do it.

This 'voracity' affects americans and H1B holders, SOME H1B holders can be
considered 'victims' of low wages at the point of slavery... well it depends
again on which side of the coin you are.

Take in account that for MANY immigrants (specially from the third world)
even a 'low' wage (30-40k?) could represent the opportunity of his/her life!!!
think abt it, for them getting an H1B EVEN with that salaries is a win-win
situation, isnt that the ideal in a business environment???. (Of course I
know this affect more to the americans IT workers, but again, going against
H1B will not eliminate the problem and I'm not for affecting nobody)

For some of us (i should include myself) going to USA is kind of ... 'let
me show my stuff, let me prove that I can do it, either same or better than
an american or another H1B, and if I can have a better life doing what I
know and like to do...what else can I ask for? This is another win-win situation.

Protectionism is one of the most hated and attacked practices from USA to
all over the world!, H1B program is a way that allow to compete, to encourage
the IT workers to push their own limits. As I said previously this is IMHO,
I'm not saying that I own the absolut truth (in case such thing exist, all
we know that it doesnt anyway!)

Now I DO KNOW that there are some companies that cheat H1B holders, US Government
and corporations at same level. Paying less than they promises to the H1B,
lying and showing false documentation to the INS and charging high rates
to the customers. Well let's go for them!!! Maybe that can solve PART of
the problem.

OK, so we're, let's imagine that there's no cheaters, the IT industry find
equally qualified workers outside USA and willing to do the job for a 'fair'
(maybe low for the american standards) salary (american company wins-immigrant
wins), so... what's this scenario? doesnt sound familiar? the offer-demand
law! (not in strict sense! dont start attacking me with formal economic models
and definitions, you all know what I'm trying to say here!)


But now let me show another scenario, there are no H1B program, all the open
IT positions are there to be taken just for the americans... do you think
that's the paradise??? NO WAY!!! the problem is the SAME, all the companies
will be looking for the hottest and MAYBE brilliant people outside, and the
industry will be pushing faster and faster for more, let's face it, it won't
stop, even without H1B holders, even with retraining, even with more intelligent
HR managers or recruiters, IT won't stop, we cant do anything abt it, these
are the rules of this game called evolution, no matters how much we complain,
no matters how many H1B holders exist.

All the games have rules and you have just 2 options, play or no play, what
side do you want to be?


Finally, I share your worries abt how the IT industry work, abt its voracity,
etc. What irritate me more in the article was pointing H1B program and unrealistic
proposals abt how to solve the problem, and as I said in my previous post,
certainly in some point of my life I'll have to resign like everybody but
meanwhile I'd like to keep fighting, competing and contributing instead of
blaming and complaining about the way this industry works. AND REMEMBER,
THIS IS JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION, I'm not trying to convince or align anyone
with me, I'm just expressing my perspective abt this issue and sharing with
all of you.


"I dont argue to convince, but I argue 'cause I'm convinced"


PS

I must apologise for my not-so-good written english, I've used the 'you'
in a generic form, is not personal Frustrated IT Worker, is just that I'm
not so fluent writting in impersonal form (if that exist in english, forgive
my ignorance in this and many others gramatic topics).

Very nicely said, David. I sometimes think these people won't be able to
really understand this phenomenon until they themselves get shoved aside
in the same fashion. Or maybe the industry will mend its ways and they won't
have to deal with it.

The good news is that it's not IMPOSSIBLE for the experienced programmer
to stay current, it's just a lot harder. And yes, I have concluded that job-hopping
is the only way and I won't stick around and help a company with their ongoing
system maintenance for just the reasons you cited. I'm back in consulting
now (for a consulting firm that doesn't insist I remain at a client if new
opportunities are absent) and I don't really see myself going back to a permanent-hire
situation. It seems to be career-suicidal.

Uh, Miguel I suppose you could interpret parts of what Matloff's article has
to say as anti H-1B. However, that was not the reason this person wrote that
article and it wasn't the reason I posted it! If you want, I can supply you
with several links that are very anti H-1B.

Your message is quite long and I don't have the time right now to provide
you with a proper response that I think you deserve (maybe this weekend?).
Even so, from the little bit that I have read so far, it appears that you
are unfamiliar with how the H-1B program is suppose to work. Miguel, most
Americans have nothing against foreign workers, if I gave you that impression
of myself than I wish to say that was not my intention. My concern is what
is happening to the IT industry in general. I made IT my chosen field and
I don't want to see what happened to the steel industry (and several other
US industries) happen to this one.

I just read an article over at Software Developer titled "A Software Superpower?"
http://www.sdmagazine.com/articles/2...103o/0103o.htm

Basically, I agree with the author's premise that India has a good chance
to be the next software superpower. The India government with all its problems
is doing some things right and it seems that India is poised to be a big
player (not just a supplier of labor) in the software market.

"Miguel Angel Gonzalez" <miguelangelglz@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I think that all we have different ways to see or approaches abt this issue.
>Everything depends on the side of the coin you are. But I'd like to point
>some facts.
>
>195,000 H1B holders SHOULD not be blamed abt this problem with the IT industry
>in USA, i mean, assuming that all the H1B holders get a job in USA (what
>is not true or real), I DO NOT believe this gonna be take out the american
>programmers or IT pro's their positions as the article states.
>
>The solution (or part of it) IS NOT reducing the H1B quota as this article
>claims, personally I found a litte bit of racism underneath and fear to
free
>competence. (Strange if you take in account that the author is married with
>an assian immigrant!)
>
>We must understand that this industry (IT), like many others, is here to
>DO BUSINESS AND MONEY, like it or not to us, so they're finding their ways
>to do it.
>
>This 'voracity' affects americans and H1B holders, SOME H1B holders can
be
>considered 'victims' of low wages at the point of slavery... well it depends
>again on which side of the coin you are.
>
>Take in account that for MANY immigrants (specially from the third world)
>even a 'low' wage (30-40k?) could represent the opportunity of his/her life!!!
>think abt it, for them getting an H1B EVEN with that salaries is a win-win
>situation, isnt that the ideal in a business environment???. (Of course
I
>know this affect more to the americans IT workers, but again, going against
>H1B will not eliminate the problem and I'm not for affecting nobody)
>
>For some of us (i should include myself) going to USA is kind of ... 'let
>me show my stuff, let me prove that I can do it, either same or better than
>an american or another H1B, and if I can have a better life doing what I
>know and like to do...what else can I ask for? This is another win-win situation.
>
>Protectionism is one of the most hated and attacked practices from USA to
>all over the world!, H1B program is a way that allow to compete, to encourage
>the IT workers to push their own limits. As I said previously this is IMHO,
>I'm not saying that I own the absolut truth (in case such thing exist, all
>we know that it doesnt anyway!)
>
>Now I DO KNOW that there are some companies that cheat H1B holders, US Government
>and corporations at same level. Paying less than they promises to the H1B,
>lying and showing false documentation to the INS and charging high rates
>to the customers. Well let's go for them!!! Maybe that can solve PART of
>the problem.
>
>OK, so we're, let's imagine that there's no cheaters, the IT industry find
>equally qualified workers outside USA and willing to do the job for a 'fair'
>(maybe low for the american standards) salary (american company wins-immigrant
>wins), so... what's this scenario? doesnt sound familiar? the offer-demand
>law! (not in strict sense! dont start attacking me with formal economic
models
>and definitions, you all know what I'm trying to say here!)
>
>
>But now let me show another scenario, there are no H1B program, all the
open
>IT positions are there to be taken just for the americans... do you think
>that's the paradise??? NO WAY!!! the problem is the SAME, all the companies
>will be looking for the hottest and MAYBE brilliant people outside, and
the
>industry will be pushing faster and faster for more, let's face it, it won't
>stop, even without H1B holders, even with retraining, even with more intelligent
>HR managers or recruiters, IT won't stop, we cant do anything abt it, these
>are the rules of this game called evolution, no matters how much we complain,
>no matters how many H1B holders exist.
>
>All the games have rules and you have just 2 options, play or no play, what
>side do you want to be?
>
>
>Finally, I share your worries abt how the IT industry work, abt its voracity,
>etc. What irritate me more in the article was pointing H1B program and unrealistic
>proposals abt how to solve the problem, and as I said in my previous post,
>certainly in some point of my life I'll have to resign like everybody but
>meanwhile I'd like to keep fighting, competing and contributing instead
of
>blaming and complaining about the way this industry works. AND REMEMBER,
>THIS IS JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION, I'm not trying to convince or align anyone
>with me, I'm just expressing my perspective abt this issue and sharing with
>all of you.
>
>
>"I dont argue to convince, but I argue 'cause I'm convinced"
>
>
>PS
>
>I must apologise for my not-so-good written english, I've used the 'you'
>in a generic form, is not personal Frustrated IT Worker, is just that I'm
>not so fluent writting in impersonal form (if that exist in english, forgive
>my ignorance in this and many others gramatic topics).

"Frustrated IT Worker" <frustrated@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Uh, Miguel I suppose you could interpret parts of what Matloff's article
has
>to say as anti H-1B. However, that was not the reason this person wrote
that
>article and it wasn't the reason I posted it! If you want, I can supply
you
>with several links that are very anti H-1B.


I DONT 'could interpret' that way, the article says textually things like...


"The solution which I believe would be best for society, the economy and
the industry itself would be:

The yearly quota for the H-1B program should be drastically reduced, say
to 15,000 per year. It should be geared mainly to hiring ``the best and the
brightest,'' as was the case for the original H-1 program which preceded
H-1B. Standards should be high, similar in stringency to those currently
in place for the EB-1 National Interest Waiver (NIW) greencard program, which
provides those of truly outstanding talents a fast track to permanent residency
which does not depend on sponsorship by an employer. (NIW standards are high;
mere possession of a graduate degree or publication of jointly-authored research
papers is not treated as sufficient evidence of outstanding talent.)"

(taken from the article http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/itaa.r...ml#tth_sEc11.1)


BTW I'm not questioning you, I'm talking abt what the articles says! or have
u ever seen that I attack you or complain abt you? or the reasons you had
to post this? no, right?

I dont need those links and I dont know from where you might be thinking
that I'm interested in such annoying links anyway.


>Even so, from the little bit that I have read so far, it appears that you
>are unfamiliar with how the H-1B program is suppose to work. Miguel, most

I perfectly know that H1B visa program was originated with some fair and
good principles that lately are not respected anymore, and I know that H1B
program could be improved to benefit immigrants and industry by the same,
but I think that 'solutions' like the quoted before are not well intentioned
at all, it denotes kind of racism and protectionism. And I'm against such
things.


And as I've stated previously I think that ALL we share the same worries
abt how this industry works, what I'm trying to say over and over is that
this article, and its 'solutions' and conclusions are VERY VERY unrealistic.

I'm not ignoring the problem I'm saying that we MUST or SHOULD adapt if we
want to continue on this, like it or not, and I'm not a defensor of how IT
works or its voracity I'm just for a change in the way we see these 'problems'
(I insist that it's the IT industry's nature) 'cause I dont think they(problems)
will disappear never, instead of, we can adapt our vision of it and align
with it, be players not spectators or complainers.

Miguel:

First, don't worry about your English! You're written English is A LOT better
than my Spanish (I assume, from your name that your native language is Spanish.
I apologize I'm wrong).

I have a different view of the article. I don't think the author is trying
to blame the H1-B visa program for anything, like you suggest. I think the
author is making two points:

1. The "shortage" of programmers isn't as bad as employers believe it is.
The problem is that the hiring practices that companies use is flawed.

2. The "solution" that has been put forward to fix the "problem", the H1-B
visa program, has flaws in it.

In other posts in this thread, I've addressed my feelings about 1. so I won't
repeat them again.

As far as 2. goes, I think the H1-B program, at the very least, needs to
be overhauled. Let me just say that I don't have a problem with letting
people immigrate to this country. After all, myself and 99.9% of Americans
are descendants of immigrants. However, the H1-B program isn't about immigration.
It's about bringing workers into this country for a temporary period of
time, working them at below market wages, and then sending them back to their
home country when their visa expires.

You made the point that the sub-market wage that many visa workers receive
is still a lot higher than what they would make in their home country. That
may be true, but it doesn't make it right. If I'm working for a company
making X, and the person sitting in the cubicle next to me is making 2X for
doing the same job, I'm not going to say, "That's okay. Even though I'm
not getting paid fairly, I'm still better off." I'm going to want to get
paid the fair wage that other people in my position are getting. The word
"exploitation" comes to mind.

Another problem with the H1-B program is that visa workers can't easily move
to a new job. It can take weeks or months to find a new visa sponsor and
get the visa transferred. In the meantime, the worker must accept whatever
work and whatever rate the employer wants to pay.

A third problem is that the H1-B visa is a temporary visa. After X number
of years (I can't remember the exact time period - 4 or 6 years?), the worker
must return to their home country if they haven't gotten a "green card".
And getting a green card isn't a guarantee. Even though the number H1-B
visas are increasing, the number of green cards isn't increasing proportionately.
The program has nothing to do with the "high-minded" idea that we, as a
nation of immigrants, should allow people to come to our country. If we
really wanted to be idealistic about it, we'd give these people permanent
residency. Instead, we use them for their skills for a few years, send them
back, and bring in a new crop of workers.

A fourth problem is that the rules of the program aren't being enforced.
The law sets down certain rules in the program to prevent companies from
exploiting visa workers, and to protect domestic workers. Companies have
to demonstrate that there is no American worker who can do the job. Then,
if they hire a visa worker, they need to pay them the market wage. Neither
one of these rules is being enforced very well. It's crazy for a country
to pass laws if they can't set aside the resources to enforce them.

Next, I wanted to address your point about that wanting to reform the program
is somehow "racist" or "protectionist". It may be a language or cultural
differenct, but the word "racist" is so overused in this country to the point
that the word has almost lost its meaning. It's a shame because there is
still a lot of "real" racism that goes on; however, because people use the
word so indiscriminantly, it's hard to know what's real and what's not.


As far as "protectionist" goes, while I don't want to go so far as to shut
down all of America's borders, from a practical standpoint, America just
can't open its borders up to everybody who shows up on our shores. We need
to have some practical limits on the number of visas we give out. Many parts
of the United States are struggling with providing the infrastructure to
our growing population. Where I live now, questions of growth and development
are very hot, political topics.

Lastly, you say something to the effect that this is the way the I.T . industry
is, so you either have to "play" or "not play". I prefer a third option.
I will "play" but while I'm playing I'm going to try to change some of the
rules so that the game is better for everyone, both for U.S. citizens and
for foreign guest workers.

David,

> "Klaus H. Probst" <kprobst@vbbox.com> wrote:
> >Hate to break the news, but a CS degree, a doctorate and 57
certifications
> >do not automagically turn you into a capable developer. All that means is
> >you can read and write.
>
> Klaus,
>
> While I agree that those things don't "automagically" make you a good
developer,
> they do mean that you CAN do more than read and write. To suggest
otherwise
> is just plain crazy.

I'm sorry David, it does. You are nothing but a guy in a suit with a bunch
of papers until I sit down and try to gauge how good a developer you are.
Period.

> Companies *today* I believe are strengthening their
> >filters, so they are of course finding less people. That's because
there's
> a
> >shortage of capable, professional developers. Not a shortage of "IT
> >personnel".
> >
>
> I think you are missing the point. Posters aren't complaining that
companies
> are strengthing their standards to weed out weak candidates. I don't have
> a problem with that. What I have a problem with is that these "standards"
> are also weeding out a lot of "capable, professional developers."

Not in my experience, no. But I can't speak for the whole of the IT
industry, for sure.

> >Posts like this (and from a few other people in this forum) reflect the
> sad
> >fact that so many people thought they could get a 75K+ salary straight
out
> >of school if they were able to spell "HTML". The reality --thank
heavens--
> >is very different. The media and IT industry both have a lot of blame in
> >this. But now all those companies that hired "programmers" and "web
> >designers" and "content managers" are getting rid of the fluff and
keeping
> >the quality, and rightly so. All this can only benefit you if you are in
> a
> >position of strength in your career or chosen area of professional
> >development. That is, if you know what you're doing.
> >
>
> I think the problem that posters like myself, Elena, etc are complaining
> about is that the people doing the hiring in I.T. don't understand what it
> takes to be a "good" programmer. When you want to hire somebody, first
you
> need to ask yourself what qualities does a candidate need to possess in
order
> to succeed in this position and at this company. Once you have identified
> these qualities, you need to gear the selection process so you identify
candidates
> who possess those qualities. It's really not rocket science.

You'd be surprised how many organizations botch this process. You can take a
measure of how good a company is by simply going through the hiring process.
You are right that it's not rocket science, but that doesn't mean it can't
be done badly.

Now if this was the original point then I agree =)

> The reality is that the qualities that make one sucessful in software
development
> are not the qualities that are being used to select candidates. Many
times
> this results in what you just described. Companies hire somebody just
because
> they have the letters "HTML" or "VB" or "XML" or
<insert-the-technology-flavor-of-the-week-here>
> on their resume. Meanwhile, candidates who would make much better
developers
> are passed over because they don't have the "magic letters" on their
resume.
> That sort of hiring practice doesn't produce the best candidates.

Of course it doesn't. But then again, that's where a good filter system
comes in. But it depends on how the the company manages the process, hands
down. All of them are different.

> The thing which concerns me the most is the effect that this has on the
software
> industry as a whole. Because employers reward work experience in specific
> tools, workers are encouraged to always try to apply the latest tools to
> problems, even if the tools aren't the best ones for the job, because they
> need the "work experience" on their resume. Workers are discouraged from
> maintaining working systems for fear of becoming obsolete supporting
"legacy
> code". Workers are encouraged to "hop" from one job to another in order
> to keep their resumes current. Workers are discouraged from sticking with
> projects long term.

Again, it comes down to the company. A good shop will simply fight to keep
you and give you the chance (or at least try like ****) to move in whatever
different directions you want to go. It doesn't always work, but it's always
good to work for someone who understands this necessity. Also, it depends a
lot of the environment you work in. For corporate IT shops, you're usually
tied to whatever the last MIS manager decided was going to be the wave of
the future (wrong or right). There's not a lot of variety and it can get
boring after a while. Consulting firms fare better in this regard because
they can arrange for you to spend six months on one project using one set of
technologies and another six months in another. Of course, not all of them
do that, but it's far easier than the corporate IT departments.

> All these things have an effect on business and the
> bottom line. It costs a lot of time and money to hire somebody and bring
> them up to speed on a project. It costs a lot of time and money to scrap
> working systems and replace them just because the developers want to keep
> their skills current. Unfortunately, it seems like this is exactly the
atmosphere
> that employers are cultivating through their hiring "filters".

Companies *know* that it takes a lot of money to hire, train and maintain
someone on the job. They're not stupid in that regard. But they are stupid
when they have a high attrition rate and they blame it on some vague factor,
like "the state of the industry" or some such. So they keep going through
the motions until they find enough people that are willing to take <insert
crappy situation here, like low salary or whatever> and keep going, or they
simply manage to cross train enough of their mainframe programmers in VB to
sorta kinda make a difference. Needless to say, there's not a lot of quality
there. So they have crappy systems. So in the end they have to bring in a
consulting firm to straighten things up. And then they realize how much it's
costing them (stupidly of course) to have the consultants, so they get rid
of them cold turkey (well some do). Then it's back to the merry go round
again. I've seen large companies repeat this over and over and over. It's
sad.


> >It's called "natural selection".
> >
>
> I agree. Companies which engage in "sub-optimal" hiring practices are
probably
> the same ones that are closing their doors.

So true :-)


____________
Klaus

Klaus:

I think we basically agree that companies need to have smarter filters in
order to get the best candidates. It's unfortunate that sometimes these
bad filters also weed out good candidates.

"Frustrated IT Worker" <frustrated@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Miguel,
>
>Are you referring to the URL I posted? If so, you need to understand that
>the article is pointing out what many people (including IT workers) don't
>know about the IT industry. For example, I constantly read articles with
>topics such as "we need to get more young people interested in computer
science".
>The problem is that there are bunch of recent computer graduates who have
>even have earned a certification in Java programming from SUN, yet they
still
>can't find an entry-level job after searching for months! If you don't believe
>me then just say so and I will post the URLs to a few Java forums and let
>you decide for yourself whether what I am telling is correct or not.
>
>I think that you may need to re-read the article since it has a lot to say
>about how much of the IT industry really works. Re-training experienced
IT
>workers is only a small aspect of what that particular article was talking
>about.
>
>There are a lot of barriers and catch-22's in the IT industry. The bottom
>line is that the IT industry is still a young and very dysfunctional field.
>
>
>Btw, working in IT is much more than just knowing the latest and greatest
>technologies. If you require further clarification on something that the
>article discussed just ask a specific question and I am sure somebody here
>will answer your question in greater detail.
>
>
>"Miguel Angel Gonzalez" <miguelangelglz@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
I recently graduated with a BSCS and was offered 48k. If there is not a shortage
of programmers, then why are fortune 500 companies offering high salaries
for people with no experience.