World_Report

March 23, 1997

THE WEEK

Indians and docs not allowed!
Immigration: Changes in US law could hurt Indian professional

While the United States remains the most desirable destination for an Indian immigrant, especially one with high qualifications, it is increasingly resembling a crowded Indian train in which those already in the compartment try to harm or discourage new-comers. Indeed, many who came to the US with high hopes are deeply troubled about some of the changes in the law and wonder whether the barriers to getting the Green Card and, later, citizenship may prove too high for them to cross.
There is a major difference between an Indian immigrant and immigrants from many other countries in that the Indians are not economic or political refugees. They are here either to join their close relatives or to seek better jobs. If they are scientists, the facilities for research, for which the US is unrivalled, are a major attraction.
But there is no NRI who is not free to return home any time unless he has committed a crime for which he is wanted in India or he has done vicious propaganda against his country in the US and he is, therefore, not welcome in India. However, such cases are few.
Although prospects in India have improved vastly, for many America is still the karmabhoomi of choice.They are now afraid that recent changes in the immigration law may force them to return home against their will.
To take a typically case, a computer programmer is brought to the US for a specific assignment by the Indian or American company. He does his job very well and impresses the American firm. It then tells him: "Why don't you work for us? We will sponsor you for the Green Card" or permanent residency, the stepping stone to citizenship. Or another company notices him at work and makes a similar offer. Possibly, a friend tells him of an opportunity in another company and he lands a job there easily.
All this was, and is, legal, though the Indian company which brought the programmer to the US may be very unhappy that he has left them instead of applying his improved skills resulting from his stay in America for the benefit of the company in India. Some, in fact, have gone to court over the issue and lost. The US is a land of free choice and anything smacking of bonded labour is looked down upon by most courts.
What happens now is that if the visa on which he came expires before he has got an extension of the work permit or Green Card through another company, he will have to go home and wait for the approval of his application by the immigration authorities. Because the applicants for immigration are far in excess of the generous quota of 20,000 a year. there is a waiting period between sanctioning an application and actual granting of the coveted Green Card.
Simple extensions of the work permit are getting to be more and more difficult. They used to be very easy. However, now the analogy of a crowded Indian railway compartment applies. Organisations have sprung up protesting to the immigration authorities they have been too lenient.
They argue that the law under which a foreigner is given a work permit only if an American citizen or permanent resident is not available for the job is not applied honestly. In too many cases the job description fits only the applicant the employer has in mind. So some citizen watchdogs ensure that temporary work visa extensions are not easily granted. The widely watched CBS-TV had a programme purporting to show that Indian computer programmers provide "cheap labour", denying lucrative jobs to natives.
However, a case brought against a Tata firm in California showed that the company was paying income-Tax and all other applicable taxes and its salaries were fair. Of course, the outcome of that case did not receive much publicity in the US, apparently because it went against popular prejudice.
For several decades, once an applicant's Green Card application was approved in principle by the immigration department in an interview, it did not matter too much how long it took for his number to come up out of the quota allotted to the country. His passport would be stamped with the notation that he was allowed to work in the US.
Then one of the legislators had the bright idea during a budget crunch that if the applicant's visa had expired while he was waiting for his turn to get the Green Card, he should pay a fine of $1,000 in order to remain in the country. This was not popular among those affected but, when one gets a salary of $40,000 or $50,000 a year, paying a thousand dollars is not much of a hardship.
Now that loophole has been plugged. The new law, which comes into effect this September, is that if the stay permit has expired, the applicant for the Green Card should go home till it is due.
That provision has made thousands unhappy. In this category are at least hundreds of Indians. including computer programmers, who now may be forced to go home after the expiry of their visas though they are, so to speak, "semi-legal" in that their Green Cards are almost certain to come. If it takes two or three years for the issue of the Green Card after its approval in principle, the employer is not going to wait that long. For all practical purposes. its outcome is the "return of the native."
Of course, if the US congress wants it can easily go back to the old provision. However, Republican congressman Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary immigration subcommittee and a leading sponsor of the law requiring those with expired visas to go home promptly, says he is against any change and he expects the law to be strictly enforced.
Dan Stein, executive director of an organisation called American Immigration Reform, whose idea of "reform" is to curb immigration, says he has little sympathy for the argument that immigrants who are "almost legal" deserve special treatment. "We are finally beginning to get some teeth in the incentive to encourage immigration law compliance," he says delightedly as he thinks of the immigrants who will be forced to return home.
As far as Smith is concerned, anyone who overstays his visa is illegal, even though his Green Card application is pending or it has been approved and it is a matter of time for its issue within the country quota.
One can argue that it is the right of every country to determine its immigration law. However, the US is preeminently a land of immigrants and one expects it to be fairer than other countries. The new law fails that test.
This is all the more so because the new laws have deprived illegal aliens--those who smuggled themselves in or whose visa has expired and they have applied for the Green Card-of the normal protection of the law. Of course, the law was abused in the past. Those deported could, if they had a good lawyer, stay on in the country for years. Now the pendulum has swung the other direction and they have been deprived of a fair chance to appeal to the courts. They can be thrown out as if they are all dangerous criminals.
New York lawyer Stanley Mailman said after President Clinton signed the new law: "This law is back 100 years in its disrespect for due process. It is pitiless in barring relief to those who have transgressed the law even in minor ways, including those with dependent US families. Decades of reasonable court decisions have been overturned in the effort to remove from immigration judges the discretion to administer the immigration law with mercy. Worse than the individual hardship is the sacrifices of the system of adjudication that we depend on for fairness."
The new law strips the courts of power to hear deportation cases. The Democratic Party is supposed to be more pro-immigration procedures, we shall have to have a president and congressional leaders who care". His column was aptly titled 'With Exquisite Cruelty'
It is not only congress and the White House that are penalised immigration. The mainstream medical associations, including the American Medical Association, are also chipping in. They have recommended that in order to meet a supposed "doctor glut" in the country, US medical schools should stop training foreign doctors unless their home countries pay for the training in the US and, when they are trained, they should be promptly sent home without being allowed to practise in America.
Basically, this is a job protection measure against foreign doctors. The medical profession is highly lucrative and American doctors want to prevent doctors who obtained their degrees originally abroad from enjoying the fruits of American affluence. That used to be so several decades ago when residents were required to leave immediately after their training. but the scene gradually changed in order to allow those trained in the US to apply for the Green Card, become citizens, serve patients and enjoy the fruits of their labour.
Currently, US medical schools graduate about 16,500 doctors a year. Teaching hospitals, however, offer about 21,000 advanced training slots annually in specialties such as cardiology, psychiatry and general surgery. To fill these positions, teaching hospitals have increasingly been offering training slots to graduates of non-medical schools.
The system is a great help to young foreign-trained doctors and it is also lucrative to the institutions offering the training in the US. The US government gives $100,000 a year to the teaching institutions for each resident, and the resident is paid $35,000 to $40,000. The teaching hospitals and institutions keep the balance. If foreign companies have to pay for the training, naturally the numbers will be drastically reduced. That precisely is the goal of the American Medical Association.
The proposal is justified on the ground that the doctor glut is real and the US cannot afford any more foreign doctors coming in to join the already overcrowded medical profession.
In earlier days, foreign-trained doctors were eagerly sought out for residency slots and given "VIP" treatment. Their quarters were ready for them when they arrived and they were met by a representative of the hospital. Now the American Medical Association is practically posting a sign; 'No More Foreign Doctors Wanted'.
These developments should be a clear warning to India to focus even more on its economic growth so that its sons and daughters can get as good opportunities at home as a fortunate few enjoy abroad.

T.V. PARASURAM in Washington