Be flexible on visas
This is not the right time for a blanket ban; our economy needs immigrant workers.
President Donald Trump’s executive order this week extending restrictions on worker visas may seem common sense to some people.
As he did in April, when the original 60-day visa ban was implemented, the president is arguing that the move will shield U.S. workers “from the threat of competition for scarce jobs.” Back then, a Washington Post-University of Maryland poll showed that rationale rang true with 65 percent of Americans, who supported the temporary halt — including almost 50 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of independents.
And why not extend it? We’re in the middle of a global pandemic. Twenty million people are without a job. The last thing America needs is more workers, right?
Right, in certain sectors. It’s a different story in others. The need for foreign workers isn’t determined by the sheer number of jobs but by the kinds of jobs.
Quite a few businesses, many already hurting due to coronavirus shutdowns, could be injured further by Trump’s move to limit their hiring options.
Even Trump supporters get this and are urging him to reconsider.
“Those who believe legal immigration, particularly work visas, are harmful to the American worker do not understand the American economy,” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted on Monday. “This decision, in my view, will have a chilling effect on our economic recovery.”
Graham’s comments are in line with a letter he and eight other senators, including Texas Sen. John Cornyn, wrote to the president in late May. The lawmakers stressed that there are already protections for American workers in the law and “guest workers are needed to boost American business, not take American jobs.”
The new restrictions, in place until the end of the year, deny entry to the United States under the H-1B, L, J and H-2B designations. These cover both skilled workers, such as computer engineers, and low-skill labor, including seasonal workers at amusement parks or resorts. There are exceptions for immigrants who work in the food service industry and those whose entry is “in the national interest,” such as health care workers.
So, do temporary workers depress wages and take jobs away from Americans? There are instances: in 2014, as Pro-Publica reported, Disney laid off about 250 longtime workers in computer jobs only to replace them with Indian workers they were required to train.
But studies have shown it’s not a widespread problem, said Pia Orrenius, vice president and senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
For the most part, employers would prefer to hire American workers and skip the onerous legal requirements to bring in a foreign employee, but the American workforce cannot fully satisfy existing demand — even with the pandemic. In fact, some companies are having more trouble hiring right now, which Orrenius attributes to workers choosing to take advantage of unemployment insurance as well as safety concerns over returning to work.
Many of the low-skill jobs that Americans used to do are no longer considered valid occupations, experts said. At the same time, the United States is not producing enough workers in the high-demand fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
Many companies are fighting to stay open right now and need immigrant labor to work alongside homegrown talent. If they go under, they won’t be hiring anyone.
“There is a case to be made in terms of asking if we’ve become overreliant on these temporary worker programs,” Orrenius told the editorial board. “But is this the time, when businesses are struggling, to be asking that question?”
Dallas and Houston are very dependent on the high-skill H-1B workforce, most of which works in the computing field — a sector that has actually seen unemployment go down during the outbreak, according to an analysis by the National Foundation for American Policy.
The president should listen to GOP senators who advise him to consider a “flexible, data-driven approach” that will “ensure an adequate supply of labor across all industries.”
Of course, pragmatic considerations over the ailing economy and the survival of American businesses may rank somewhere just below Trump’s election year push to appeal to anti-immigrant elements.
If the president is really interested in looking out for the American worker, he needs to look beyond his political base.