The O1A visa is definitely the right visa for startup founders. I think that with a little hair-twisting and a good attorney, the current criteria for the visa can be twisted to cover most startup founders who have some kind of a track record.<p>I am by no means someone special in any way, compared to things that many other HNers have done. But I have now received an O1A visa successfully, twice.<p>I think the bigger problem with having that visa (or an H1B) is that it makes the prospect of quitting incredibly daunting. Each time you change your job, you have to leave the country, apply anew, risk being denied, and spend another 10k on legal & filing fees.
Have rank and file developers ever tried to form any sort of association to advocate for their own interests, which seem adverse to those of founder types? It would seem like there are a couple hundred thousand tech types in California alone who would prefer not to have compete with a new flood of H1B and other visa holders. I support the type of candidates that this story is about but my fear would be that it's a back end run by the entrenched interests to turn a small pathway into a large one, and a couple years later we awake to find thousands of ''exceptional'' cubical dwellers in Infosys' new offices.
Why don't they just divert some of the 32,000 visas from Infosys to Startups?<p>I can't help but notice the inverse relationship between the number of H1-B's sponsored and the average salary by company.<p><a href="http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2014-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2014-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx</a>
I'm unclear on exactly what change Ohanian is proposing. Most of the changes mentioned can already be used to apply for the visa, can't they? So what is the actual legislative change being proposed?<p>Is the proposal really that YC acceptance becomes a singular criteria for getting the visa? So YC and their peers, in effect, would have full power to grant unlimited visas to people of their choice?<p>If that is what is being proposed, that sounds like a massive conflict of interest, with potential for serious abuse, even if the intent is positive.
It's a bit sad that such big players are fighting for such a small, incremental step. The number of successful founders facing immigration problems sounds like it would be orders of magnitude smaller than the number of potential foreign employees. Is my intuition wrong there?<p>I also fear that a "win" here will allow legislators to push off further reform (e.g. "we just did something") instead of serve as a meaningful stepping stone.
Indeed. I'm a H1-B visa holder, with exceptional wages, and my wife is not allowed to work here. Ok, so she finished her Ph.D in the 3 years here.<p>But with all this new visa drama going on, no updates in the visa extension process so far, and the broken promise that spouses will be able to work, I just told my company that I'll have to go back to Germany and work remote from there.<p>Plan B.
But the benefit is that I will be able to live in a democratic country again, with a much better standard of living. It's only 7 hours and I worked remote for a couple of US companies before.<p>If companies need those foreigners why should the government on behalf of the unions intervene? Do they know better than the companies which is good for them?
We definitely need to get more creative with visas. Gov. Snyder here in Michigan has proposed in a meeting with President Obama that he help create 50,000 visas over five years for immigrants willing to live in Detroit. They would either have advanced degrees or exceptional ability in certain fields.<p><a href="http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20140123/NEWS/140129933/snyder-seeks-50000-work-visas-to-lure-immigrants-to-detroit" rel="nofollow">http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20140123/NEWS/140129933...</a><p>With 700,000 people living in a city that used to hold over two million there's plenty of room.
How about re-purposing H1s issued to the sweatshop Indian firms ( which generally bring in the cheap labor) to tech companies and startups. That is probably tens of thousands of visas right there.
I like the idea of linking a work via to a person who has been able to raise money. I mean, why the hell would you <i>not</i> want that person to stay in the US?<p>One concern might be the ability to game the system, but I think with the right parameters that could be minimized.