The Senate voted Friday to restrict the hiring of foreign workers by banks that are receiving government bailout funds while undergoing vast layoffs.The legislation by Sens. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, would require the banks to seek American workers before turning to foreign nationals when they're hiring. It aims to prevent replacement of Americans by foreigners working under the H-1B visa program, which allows employers to bring in workers for high-skilled and advanced-degree jobs.The measure has a two-year life and if signed into law would apply to the more than 300 banks that are receiving money from the taxpayer-funded Troubled Asset Relief Program.The Senate added the restriction as part of the massive economic stimulus package lawmakers are crafting as part of President Barack Obama's plan to reinvigorate the economy.If it becomes law, banks seeking visas to bring in foreign workers would be barred from displacing or replacing American employees for three months before and three months after petitioning the government for the visas.To win votes, Sanders and Grassley softened what they had originally proposed, a flat-out one-year ban on hiring foreign-visa workers, but extended the measure to two years. They made the banks subject to restrictions that apply to employers whose work force is made up of more than 15 percent foreign visa workers, a category that normally would not include banks.Sanders said the measure effectively would "make sure that banks receiving a taxpayer bailout are not allowed to import cheaper labor from overseas while they are laying off American workers."The American Immigration Lawyers Association blasted the Senate action, and derided "knee-jerk, fear-driven policies that will stymie growth."If it becomes law, the group said in a news release, banks will be hard-pressed to hire foreign nationals or extend visas of current employees for two years, and thus will not have access to "top-flight global talent who can help create jobs for U.S. workers."Stuart Anderson, director of the National Foundation for American Policy, an Arlington, Va.-based think tank, said: "It seems to be an unwise policy to deny companies access to talented people simply because those individuals weren't born in the United States."Sanders and Grassley introduced the legislation after an Associated Press investigation found the dozen banks now receiving the lion's share of taxpayer bailout funds had sought a Department of Labor green light for 21,800 foreign worker visa slots over the past six years.The banks asked the government for permission to hire workers whose jobs ranged from senior vice presidents to junior investment bankers and human resources specialists, at an average salary of $90,751. The banks, however, ended up hiring fewer employees.Partial data from the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services suggests that the banks ultimately got visas for only about one-quarter of the number of workers they initially sought permission to employ. For example, the banks and their subsidiaries filed more than 5,000 visa applications with Labor Department officials during the 2006 budget year. After that step, they ended up with about 1,200 new workers approved by the Citizenship and Immigration agency.

i can see why a scientist or computer programmer has "special skills" to qualify for immigration. But what is the special skill for IB work? There is no special skill for banking. Good job, US senate. We do NOT want more bankers to immigrate to America! We do not want to become a nation of I bankers!

QuoteOriginally posted by: deepvaluei can see why a scientist or computer programmer has "special skills" to qualify for immigration. But what is the special skill for IB work? There is no special skill for banking. Good job, US senate. We do NOT want more bankers to immigrate to America! We do not want to become a nation of I bankers!Its not only about skills, its also about productivity and hard work.Foreigners work extra hard and help improve productivity/profitability of firms, otherwise they won't be hiring them in the first place.

QuoteForeigners work extra hard and help improve productivity/profitability of firms, otherwise they won't be hiring them in the first placeThis is not entirely accurate. In my experience whether someone is a hard worker or not is not dependent on where the person comes from. I have worked with many smart lazy people, smart hard workers, and dumbassess which all came from the same country. Typically in the US when starting a new job an employee usually only gets 2 weeks of vacation. In Europe I believe the average is 4 weeks if not higher.

If local workers represented a better value proposition these firms wouldn't have been going to the cost of hiring foreign workers all these years.Furthermore Americans do not want many tech jobs (probably even see them as beneath them) so the banks hired from abroad. Politicians are getting their constituents all riled up about jobs that they wouldn't want anyway... People who are born and grow up in the states have lived a privaledged life, doing what they find interesting versus what they have to, and still in many instances ended up getting what they want. That all being said, to start making labour restrictions will only lead to people finding alternative methods to skirt the regulations, which will probably end up costing the country even more, and ultimately a drive towards the US losing even more of it's edge. Barack Obama has been a great dissappointment with his lack of insight into human nature and the usage of Keynesian Economics. Frankly the way the Americans are handling the crisis they won't have to worry about immigration because in a decade no-one will want to come to the US.

QuoteOriginally posted by: MarineQuoteForeigners work extra hard and help improve productivity/profitability of firms, otherwise they won't be hiring them in the first placeThis is not entirely accurate. In my experience whether someone is a hard worker or not is not dependent on where the person comes from. I have worked with many smart lazy people, smart hard workers, and dumbassess which all came from the same country. Typically in the US when starting a new job an employee usually only gets 2 weeks of vacation. In Europe I believe the average is 4 weeks if not higher.Is the number of statutory vacation weeks a definition of laziness or hard work?

Actually I believe that the US has 1 or 2 more public holidays than the UK - the difference in associates leave between the two contries at top tier firms is literally 2 or 3 days...

QuoteOriginally posted by: EscapeArtist999Actually I believe that the US has 1 or 2 more public holidays than the UK - the difference in associates leave between the two contries at top tier firms is literally 2 or 3 days...Some EU stats i have had a look some time ago measure the annual manhours of work on a per country basis. The surprise was that UK stats exhibited less mean manhours than continental countries.

And 92.15% of statistics are made up on the spot Anthis... You will have to do a little better than that... We are also talking about Quants and Finance related professionals... You are making the mistake of bringing up a general statistics to argue for a specific subclass...

You should go and work for the Obama Administration Anthis.

QuoteOriginally posted by: EscapeArtist999And 92.15% of statistics are made up on the spot Anthis... You will have to do a little better than that... We are also talking about Quants and Finance related professionals... You are making the mistake of bringing up a general statistics to argue for a specific subclass...No, my argument was that 2 or 4 weeks of annual leave doesnt define if one is lazy or hardworking.

This illustrates a problem that many of us overlook.The shallw end of the labour pool finds it difficult to compete with a global workforce, and thus supports openly racist measures that his lack of economics let them believe will do them some good.Being older than most around here, I find it necessary to talk about an ancient technology called the "Internet". Underneath twitter and Wilmott.com is this collection of pipes, satellites and highly trained insects that transfer what us geezers call "information" all over the planet.Democrats apparently believes that the foreigners who are better qualified to do the job than "natives" will retreat to living in mud huts and devote their lives to digging ditches and driving rickshaws.However using the old style technologies I cite, they can work in India, China, etc, but of course for less money. The H1Bs are typically partly educated in the USA, and of course trained in the American way of banking.Thus you have a bunch of people who can and will do the same work for less money, and who do it the same way The insects will carry the results of their labour to the right screens.ome will start businesses, and in various other ways compete with US workers.Imagine if a US manufacturer had bought state of the art factory machines from abroad. Imagine then if racist Democrats banned these machines, and made him ship them to India where they could be used at 1./3 the cost.Would this help US manufacturing.Electing a black leader does not stop you being racist, it just changes the set of people you victimise, and in no way makes racism smarter.

The other effect of the legislation is that banks will avoid participating in U.S. Treasury programs if all possible. This will increase the opacity of bank balance sheets (to avoid being sucked under the government's TARP) and will decrease the efficiency of the various toxic asset and loan facility programs. This, in turn, increases the chance of further crises and decreases the Fed/UST tools for coping with any future crises.Protectionism is a program for losers, by losers, and designed to create more losers.

QuoteOriginally posted by: traderjoe1976The Senate voted Friday to restrict the hiring of foreign workers by banks that are receiving government bailout funds while undergoing vast layoffs.wow. well done patriots!