Unskilled workers don't have a path to permanent residency

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Shikha Dalmia

For two decades, immigration bashers have stymied any attempt to regularize the status of illegal aliens in this country by employing one, single argument against them: They are queue-jumpers who illegally crossed the border ahead of those patiently waiting their turn.

But the argument is a fallacy based on a complete misstatement of U.S. immigration policy. There is no such line – a legal pathway to citizenship for unskilled workers. Still, this unfair accusation has transformed "amnesty" into a dirty word.

Unlike Ronald Reagan, who unabashedly adopted the term to push for permanent residency for the 2.7 million illegally in the country in the mid-1980s, every immigration advocate today is disavowing it. President Bush vociferously denies that his plan for comprehensive immigration reform has any amnesty component to it.

But amnesty has a long and honorable history. It was first used in the Civil War when the victorious Unionists employed it to give Confederate forces a pass from prosecution. In the 1980s, it was a popular tool of state governments to encourage tax compliance.

Indeed, the need for amnesty is often a sign of the inefficacy, even injustice, of a law. It suggests that enforcing the law might prove more costly – monetarily and socially – than temporarily suspending it. The biggest reason, however, why reasonable people don't find anything inherently wrong with amnesty is this: It restores the legal standing of its intended beneficiaries without producing any palpable harm to others.

The queue-jumping argument powerfully suggests that amnesty for illegals means depriving others, more worthy, of entry into the country. Worse, it implies that undocumented workers actually have a choice of taking the legal road just like those waiting in line, but choose to ignore it.

These suggestions are patently false.

Skilled, unskilled

Current immigration law distinguishes between skilled and "unskilled" workers. The process for acquiring permanent residency – or a green card – for skilled workers is long, costly, and fraught with failure. But at least there is one. Not so for unskilled workers.

Skilled workers can try to get the tightly-capped H-1B visa, a temporary work visa that allows them to work in the country while applying for a green-card and eventually citizenship. The closest equivalent to an H-1B visa for non-agricultural unskilled workers – the bulk of the illegal population – is an H-2B visa. These visas have just as tight a cap as H-1Bs, but they have many additional constraints. They are meant only for seasonal jobs and are self-liquidating. This means that once a worker has installed a piece of machinery or assisted a landscape company through its peak season, the visa automatically expires.

Unskilled workers wishing for more permanent employment in, say, a hotel's house-cleaning department, have virtually no visa options to enter the country legally. Furthermore, unlike skilled workers who can apply for a green card while on an H-1B, H-2B visa holders are effectively barred from doing so. In fact, they risk losing their H-2B – or, worse, not even getting one – if they signal an intention of applying for a green card.

In essence, there is no queue for unskilled workers to stand in. Amnesty for them therefore has zero bearing on the wait time of skilled workers. And without amnesty, there is no way currently for them to become permanent residents.

The so-called problem of illegal immigration is purely the creation of America's restrictive immigration laws. But the queue-jumping argument has allowed immigration opponents to seize the moral high ground and make the enforcement of these restrictive policies the issue, rather than their reform.

They have also managed to kill Bush's comprehensive immigration reform proposal that would have created a guest worker program for future unskilled workers while simultaneously ramping up border enforcement. Indeed, the most promising immigration compromise now wending its way through the Senate contains a "trigger" mechanism that would delay the implementation of a guest worker program until: effective sanctions against employers using illegals are put in place; border patrolling is bolstered; and all foreign entrants have a biometric ID. These conditions are so onerous that this "trigger" will likely never go off. This is not immigration reform; this is immigration status-quo forever entrenched into law.

Immigration reformers need to reject this faux compromise. And before they approach the issue again, they need to first recapture the high ground by exposing the myth of the queue – and forthrightly embracing amnesty.

http://reason.org/ne...ow/1002839.html

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I thought the point of worker immigration was to bring people who had skills that the US doesn't have or generally lacks? So why bring in workers with no skills at all?

The only reason I can think of is that it drives wages down and creates more corporate profit.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Sousuke

[Ban Hammer 13,398]

I thought the point of worker immigration was to bring people who had skills that the US doesn't have or generally lacks? So why bring in workers with no skills at all?

The only reason I can think of is that it drives wages down and creates more corporate profit.

what better way to be an american?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/31197-americans-with-no-abilities-act-awnaa/

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Dalmia's article is cent-percent twaddle--since unskilled workers DO have paths to permanent residency:

• marriage to a skilled worker who is in GC process
• marriage to a GC holder (albeit takes longer)
• parent of USC
• child (note: age/marital-status restrictions apply) of USC or GC holder
• sibling of USC aka FB-4 (which is probably the reason for the gross backlogs--12 to 22 years--in this category)
• marriage to USC

Edited June 2, 2010 by Saddle Bronc

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I thought the point of worker immigration was to bring people who had skills that the US doesn't have or generally lacks? So why bring in workers with no skills at all?

The only reason I can think of is that it drives wages down and creates more corporate profit.

Who built the railroads?

[mawilson 2,133]

Who built the railroads?

The Chinese?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Who built the railroads?

Union Pacific

Seriously though, yes migrant unskilled labour. But in the 21st century such opportunities are limited and the ability to support population growth in North America is also limited.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Union Pacific

Seriously though, yes migrant unskilled labour. But in the 21st century such opportunities are limited and the ability to support population growth in North America is also limited.

Low or unskilled jobs have had the largest growth over the last decade. My point is that it should be need based and employer sponsored. As the OP points out, there is no legal path for these types of workers even though there is a need or we wouldn't have a guest worker program.

[DukeOfYork 28]

The Chinese?

http://cprr.org/Museum/Chinese.html

[momof1 205]

There are H2a visa for agricultural workers which is one of the jobs that all Americans supposedely don't want to do. Why should it offer a path to residency/citizenship? Most people want to come to the US to work and make money before their ultimate return home. With seasonal visas, workers fill needed jobs(without displacing american workers which is a requirement for H2a visas)and return home to their families with enough money to sustain them until next year.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Low or unskilled jobs have had the largest growth over the last decade. My point is that it should be need based and employer sponsored. As the OP points out, there is no legal path for these types of workers even though there is a need or we wouldn't have a guest worker program.

low or unskilled american & lpr workers should not have to compete w/ illegal immigrants for those jobs. all illegal immigrants do is drive wages down & company profits up.

For two decades, immigration bashers have stymied any attempt to regularize the status of illegal aliens in this country by employing one, single argument against them: They are queue-jumpers who illegally crossed the border ahead of those patiently waiting their turn.

way to keep water clear & attempting to prevent the arguement from becoming heated.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There are H2a visa for agricultural workers which is one of the jobs that all Americans supposedely don't want to do. Why should it offer a path to residency/citizenship? Most people want to come to the US to work and make money before their ultimate return home. With seasonal visas, workers fill needed jobs(without displacing american workers which is a requirement for H2a visas)and return home to their families with enough money to sustain them until next year.

There are other jobs that are low or unskilled labor that most Americans won't do or more accurately, can't afford to do - like dishwashers, housemaids, etc. An employer should be able to sponsor such workers if they can reasonably demonstrate a need, and those workers should then be able to find work elsewhere if they are no longer needed.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

low or unskilled american & lpr workers should not have to compete w/ illegal immigrants for those jobs. all illegal immigrants do is drive wages down & company profits up.

way to keep water clear & attempting to prevent the arguement from becoming heated.

To be fair, that's the text from the article not the poster.

IMO the US economy has been changing since the 1980's towards the lower skilled service sector job but the workforce hasn't adjusted. Its really sad actually to think that many people these days spend 40,000 dollars on a degree and end up working in low skilled jobs.

[momof1 205]

I worked in the hospitality industry in New Orleans almost 8 years ago. At that time all of the cooks, dishwashers and housekeeping were African Americans from the projects. It's not that no one will do them. Poor people can and will do "lesser jobs" if they have no other choice. What changed between 2002 and 2010 that we think only illegal hispanic workers will perform these jobs?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

There are other jobs that are low or unskilled labor that most Americans won't do or more accurately, can't afford to do - like dishwashers, housemaids, etc. An employer should be able to sponsor such workers if they can reasonably demonstrate a need, and those workers should then be able to find work elsewhere if they are no longer needed.

This can be fixed if the supply of such labor is suppressed.