This is just a driveby legal shakedown. The requirement for PERM/greencard application is to prove there was sufficient effort to hire an US citizen first. The standard practice is post a ad matching the applicants qualification on local papers first. I went through the process twice at two different companies since I left the first one before PERM was completed. Apple just happened to be a juice target here. The real culprit is the backward immigration system designed to pacify voters.
The voters are pandered to, no sane policy can survive the senate.
The reality is that without immigration, this work will just shift to India, full stop. Visa sponsorship is a plum that benefits the outsourcer in their recruitment.
The current system very much benefits the US. Work visa holders pay taxes, support the local economy, and navigate a difficult journey to a green card and citizenship.
When you let populists rile up “the voters”, you get what’s happened in agriculture. Long standing seasonal migration get harder, and the farming moves to Mexico. We let the packinghouse unions get busted, and now there’s an environmental disaster in feed lots and rural facilities.
The perm process is absurdly stupid, people you put those « ads » for are already working there on a H1B/L1, no company would decide to hire anyone else for their position.
"Pacify" implies doing something, anything, to keep something calm and under control, not necessarily solving the actual problem or doing what would be best long term.
A good government should explain to the electorate the consequences of restricting immigration, because in reality people who don't want immigration probably wouldn't actually like living in a country with no immigration. However, it's a lot easier to appear to be doing something, without really doing much.
The ultimate example would be the Brexit vote in the UK. The population were promised that it would solve all their problems, enormous amounts of anger which could only be quelled by an exit were successfully generated and in 2016, 52% of the population voted for to leave. Fast forward to 2023, and only 33% of the population thinks it was a good decision.
> Shouldn’t the immigration system—and every system—be designed to pacify voters?
To an extent, yes — but like all humans, voters can sometimes focus too narrowly on the short term, and/or on their own desires and fears; sometimes a broader perspective is needed. (That's why some elected officials used to say, in effect, "My voters elected me to exercise my judgment.")
They admit culpability, they didn't even post the jobs, and required applicants to physically mail applications in. Something something pacify voters, huh?
That amount is an embarrassing joke. What's going on that's causing these appallingly low penalties for companies? Is it just that the legislation was written without these kinds of megacorps in mind? Is it trepidation on the part of regulators? Seriously, what is going on here?
I think the real punishment for Apple is that it’ll be harder for their employees to get their PERMs certified i.e. more likely to be denied/audited (audit adds 5-6 months on top of the normal 10-11 months), which has been the case for Facebook since the same settlement with DOJ.
Wait until you learn about enforcement for outright wage theft. In many cases the penalty is nothing, and employers sometimes even get to keep some of the stolen wages. In most cases it's not even pursued by the DoL
This is not going to change anything - Apple makes $109,229 per second(https://tipalti.com/profit-per-second/) - this so called penalty is 3.8 hours of Apple's profit. This is equivalent to a parking ticket for Apple.
Not that it changes much beyond the US GDP but you labeled the per minute figure per second.
Impact aside, which is should absolutely impact more, I'm almost doubtful the practice is even a net loss for them. ${years} of the hiring practice for an unknown number of individuals may have even been worth more than the fine.
Some other comments note it may have other impacts though, so maybe that's the real influence.
Readit News
Shouldn’t any immigration system actualize the will of the voters?
The reality is that without immigration, this work will just shift to India, full stop. Visa sponsorship is a plum that benefits the outsourcer in their recruitment.
The current system very much benefits the US. Work visa holders pay taxes, support the local economy, and navigate a difficult journey to a green card and citizenship.
When you let populists rile up “the voters”, you get what’s happened in agriculture. Long standing seasonal migration get harder, and the farming moves to Mexico. We let the packinghouse unions get busted, and now there’s an environmental disaster in feed lots and rural facilities.
Dead Comment
Shouldn’t the immigration system—and every system—be designed to pacify voters?
A good government should explain to the electorate the consequences of restricting immigration, because in reality people who don't want immigration probably wouldn't actually like living in a country with no immigration. However, it's a lot easier to appear to be doing something, without really doing much.
The ultimate example would be the Brexit vote in the UK. The population were promised that it would solve all their problems, enormous amounts of anger which could only be quelled by an exit were successfully generated and in 2016, 52% of the population voted for to leave. Fast forward to 2023, and only 33% of the population thinks it was a good decision.
To an extent, yes — but like all humans, voters can sometimes focus too narrowly on the short term, and/or on their own desires and fears; sometimes a broader perspective is needed. (That's why some elected officials used to say, in effect, "My voters elected me to exercise my judgment.")
sounds like you might be happier back in China?
Dead Comment
Impact aside, which is should absolutely impact more, I'm almost doubtful the practice is even a net loss for them. ${years} of the hiring practice for an unknown number of individuals may have even been worth more than the fine.
Some other comments note it may have other impacts though, so maybe that's the real influence.
More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38224950
The optics are that this is totally ok.