America should have a policy of labor self-sufficiency. The goal should be to develope Native Born-and White-engineering talent.

There is no need to import Asian scab workers.

Let labor scarcities work. Of course, this gets right to the heart of the issue. Letting labor scarcites work would result in Native Born White workers having significant leverage over the bossman, and if the terms of employment are not favorable , a Native Born White Worker can tell the bossman to fuck off and easily find employment at a company where the pay is high and the work environment does not resemble a prison block.

This is why Bill Gates is so terrified of immigration restrictions. He would no longer be able to be a demigod in this world with the power of life and death over Native Born White workers. Its not very complicated.I hope some one puts a bullet in Bill Gates’s Brain. He is a piece of shit

From the Vdare.com “Letters to the Editor” page today:

Judging from the recent activity on the blogs which are operated by the Washington Post, Business Week, and Slashdot, the debate over H-1B visas for foreign professional workers is once again heating up even as Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) composes the new “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” bill in relative secrecy with input from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Unfortunately, many bloggers on both sides of the H-1B issue often get bogged down in ideological rants about the mythical “Free Market” or un-provable assertions about the relative skills and education levels of U.S. and foreign professionals.

In my opinion, the salient issue in the ongoing H-1B debate is the principle of representative government, which is the bedrock upon which the United States was founded. Indeed, without representative government, the United States would never have attained either the widespread economic prosperity or the wonderful civil liberties which have made America the preferred destination for immigrants from all over the globe.

However, in order for the citizens of the United States to have representative government, federal programs that affect the daily lives of citizens must be operated in a transparent manner. Furthermore, elected officials must be accountable to the citizens whose interests they supposedly represent. The H-1B program fails miserably on both counts.

There is little if any transparency in the H-1B program. Ever since its inception in 1990, this program has been characterized by a consistent pattern of concealment, as evidenced by the following:

1) The Department of Labor cannot determine (or will not reveal) exactly how many H-1B visa holders are currently working in the United States.

2) The Department of Labor usually does not list which companies have filed Labor Condition Applications (LCAs) to hire H-1B workers for open positions until long after the LCAs have been filed and the foreign workers have actually been hired. The delay can sometimes be from six to 12 months. This time lag is puzzling, because it exists in spite of an e-filing system (implemented in 2002), which was supposed to speed up the H-1B application and reporting process.

3) The Department of Homeland Security apparently cannot (or will not) determine how many H-1B visa holders have overstayed their visas. This deficiency, whether real or contrived, is inexcusable for an agency that is charged with protecting domestic lives and property from the ongoing threat of foreign terrorism.

4) The attempts (in Congress) to expand the H-1B program usually come at the end of the year or in lame duck sessions after elections, when the general public is less likely to be paying attention to political matters. Often the attempts come in the form of underreported stealth amendments to “must-pass” bills such as Omnibus spending packages.

The corporate executives and their lobbyists claim that the H-1B program is vital to America’s competitiveness and beneficial to the American economy. If that is truly the case, then why has the Federal Government operated it under such a veil of secrecy for more than 16 years?

In pursuit of accountability, I have repeatedly raised these issues (in writing) to my representative in the U.S. House of Representatives as well as to my two Senators. The results of these efforts have been abysmal. All I ever get in response are generic form letters that do not address my specific concerns. Not coincidentally, all three of these elected officials (and many others in Congress) receive generous campaign contributions from corporations who hire foreign workers under the H-1B visa program.

The implication is clear. The lawmakers allow the H-1B program to be operated in a manner that makes a mockery of representative government, apparently at the behest of their corporate benefactors. This program, which is implemented using taxpayer funds, should be terminated for that reason alone.

get this:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050917-112656-6698r.htm

In-state tuition for illegals spurs civil action in N.Y.

New York has joined Texas as the second state since early August to become the target of discrimination complaints for laws allowing illegal aliens who live in those states to go to college cheaper than out-of-state students who are U.S. citizens.

In both cases, the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) filed the formal complaints with the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. That agency is responsible for investigating complaints of violations of rights arising from federal immigration laws.

Prof. Norm Matloff’s latest e-newsletter mentions a new article he’s posted (the URL for this e-mailed newsletter can probably be found at Prof. Matloff’s own web-site archives; none is included with the e-mail):

To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter

CIS has just published a new article by me, titled “H-1Bs:  Still Not the Best and the Brightest.” The title alludes to an earlier article I wrote for CIS, in which I had done some preliminary statistical work showing that most H-1Bs are ordinary people doing ordinary work, not the geniuses claimed by the industry lobbyists.  In the present article I present much more direct statistical analysis along these lines.

Here I use a market-based approach to show that:

1.  The vast majority of H-1Bs are not of outstanding talent.

2.  This is also true when the data are broken down by occupation.

3.  This is also true for almost all prominent tech firms that were analyzed.

4.  Contrary to the constant hyperbole in the press that “Johnnie can’t do math” in comparison with kids in Asia, the workers from Western European countries tend to be more talented than those of their Asian counterparts.

Please note the implications of my article apply as much (actually, more) to the employer-based green-card system as to H-1B itself.  This is a crucial point, as there are proposals in Congress (rumored scheduled for serious consideration by Congress in May) to expand both the H-1B and green card programs — both of which expansions would adversely impact job opportunities and wages for U.S. citizens and permanent residents.

You can read the article at http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/back508.html

Norm

Here are a few excerpts:

In pressuring Congress to expand the H-1B work visa and employment-based green-card programs, industry lobbyists have recently adopted a new tack. Seeing that their past cries of a tech labor shortage are contradicted by stagnant or declining wages, their new buzzword is innovation.  Building on their perennial assertion that the foreign workers are “the best and the brightest,” they now say that continued U.S. leadership in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) hinges on our ability to import the world’s best engineers and scientists.  Yet, this [article] will present new data analysis showing that the vast majority of the foreign workers — including those at most major tech firms — are people of just ordinary talent, doing ordinary work.  They are not the innovators the industry lobbyists portray them to be.

I presented some initial analyses along these lines in an earlier [article],1 showing for instance that STEM foreign students at U.S. universities tend to be at the less-selective universities.  Here I present a much more direct analysis, making use of a simple but powerful idea:  If the foreign workers are indeed outstanding talents, they would be paid accordingly.  We can thus easily determine whether a foreign worker is among “the best and the brightest” by computing the ratio of his salary to the prevailing wage figure stated by the employer.  Let’s call this the Talent Measure (TM). Keep in mind that a TM value of 1.0 means that the worker is merely average, not of outstanding talent.

I computed median TM values for various subgroups of interest.  A summary of the results is:

-- The median TM value over all foreign workers studied was just a hair over 1.0.

-- The median TM value was also essentially 1.0 in each of the tech professions studied.

-- Median TM was near 1.0 for almost all prominent tech firms that were analyzed.

-- Contrary to the constant hyperbole in the press that “Johnnie can’t do math” in comparison with kids in Asia, TM values for workers from Western European countries tend to be much higher than those of their Asian counterparts.

Again noting that a TM value of 1.0 means just average, the data show dramatically that most foreign workers, the vast majority of whom are from Asia, are in fact not “the best and the brightest.”

This article also presents further data showing an equally important point:

-- Most foreign workers work at or near entry level, described by the Department of Labor in terms akin to apprenticeship.  This counters the industry’s claim that they hire the workers as key innovators, and again we will see a stark difference between the Asians and Europeans.

[...]

Talent Measure Analysis

Again, I take as our Talent Measure (TM) the ratio of a worker’s salary to the prevailing wage claimed by the employer. The employer is legally required to pay at least the prevailing wage, and must state on the PERM application how that wage level was determined.3 Since the application will be rejected if the wage offered is below the prevailing wage, by definition all values of TM will be at least 1.0.  The latter value means “the average worker,” i.e. of average talent, so if most workers have TM values close to 1.0, then most are probably not “the best and the brightest.”

With that it mind, let’s look at TM values, both overall and also for some specific occupations:  [see “specific occupations chart in text] The trend, both general and for STEM occupations, is clear:  Most TM values are only a little higher than 1.0, indicating that most of the foreign workers are not outstanding talents.

The sole exceptional occupation is mathematicians.  Though rather few workers are in this category, the TM value is worth some comment.  The anomaly is likely due to the recent interest in data mining, which has created a de facto two-tier wage structure among mathematicians, in which those who specialize in data mining are paid much more.  Since the prevailing wage figures do not distinguish between these tiers, the official prevailing wage value set for mathematicians will be well below the market wage for data miners.  Thus it is probable that even these foreign workers are not “the best and the brightest.”

Lobbyists for the big firms often claim that abuse of the H-1B program occurs mainly in Indian-owned “bodyshops” (firms that subcontract H-1Bs to larger companies), while by contrast the big firms are hiring “the best and the brightest.” Yet neither this scapegoating of the Indians nor the claim of hiring the top talents is warranted.  Consider the TM values after disaggregation by firm:  [see chart of break-down by firm] Though these figures are slightly above the overall figures we saw earlier, they still show that the firms are not paying salaries indicating top talents.

Even Microsoft, on the high end of the companies shown here, is not paying top dollar, as seen by restricting attention to Microsoft’s workers holding the O-1 visa.  As O-1 is specifically for, in the phrasing of the statute, “workers of extraordinary ability,” this gives us a measure of the salaries Microsoft pays to those foreign workers who in fact are “the best and the brightest.” The median TM for Microsoft O-1 workers is 1.404.  That represents a salary premium of more than double what the firm is giving its foreign workers in general, so there does not appear to be much support for Microsoft’s claim that most of their H-1Bs are of extraordinary talent. [...]

East vs. West

The lobbyists love to claim that the industry resorts to hiring foreign workers because Americans are weak in math and science.  Various international comparisons of math/science test scores at the K-12 level are offered as “evidence.” The claims are specious — after all, both major sources of foreign tech workers, India and China, refuse to participate in those tests, and India continues to be plagued with a high illiteracy rate.  Serious educational research, including an earlier Arizona State university report[4] and a recent major study by the Urban Institute[5] show clearly that mainstream American kids are doing fine in STEM.  [Scroob note:  notice the qualifier “mainstream” here:  clearly it’s code for white]

Nevertheless, the “Asian mystique” persists.  The image is that our tech industry owes its success to armies of mathematical geniuses arriving to U.S. graduate schools from Asia.  Once again, though, the data do not support this perception.  Here is a comparison of TM values for foreign workers from the major Asian countries and their counterparts in Europe and Canada:  [see chart of comparison by country] The differences here are not large, but nevertheless, all of the Western nations have higher median TM values than all the Asian nations — quite the opposite of the portrayal by the industry lobbyists.

Taking a closer look, let’s tabulate median TM for the major worker-sending nations in both hemispheres, against the major occupations:  [see chart of major occupation by country] While still mild, the trend again indicates that the Western foreign workers are the more talented ones.

Finally, what about individual firms? Interestingly, the gap between East and West widens. Let’s check the firms with the largest numbers of foreign workers:  [see chart] There are some interesting exceptions for China, but in general the trend follows the previous pattern.

[...]

Conclusions

The lobbyists know that crying educational doom-and-gloom sells.  Even though it was mainly “Johnnie,” rather than Arvind or Qing-Ling, who originally developed the computer industry, and even though all major East Asian governments have lamented their educational systems’ stifling of creativity, the lobbyists have convinced Congress that the industry needs foreign workers from Asia in order to innovate.

The facts show otherwise. Most foreign tech workers, particularly those from Asia, are in fact not “the best and the brightest.” This is true both overall and in the key tech occupations, and most importantly, in the firms most stridently demanding that Congress admit more foreign workers.  Expansion of the guest worker programs — both H-1B visas and green cards — is unwarranted.

Among the footnotes in both Matloff articles can be found a wealth of additional articles by various authors.  To take one example, here’s an excerpt from one written a decade ago but still very timely and informative:

Long term labor shortages do not happen naturally in market economies.
That is not to say that they don’t exist.  They are created when employers or government agencies tamper with the natural functioning of the wage mechanism.

To get an idea of expert opinion on this topic, consider the 1990 testimony of Dr. Michael S. Teitelbaum, later to become Vice-Chairman of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform and considered by many, the foremost expert on the migration of the highly skilled:

“...the very phrase itself, ‘labor shortage’ provokes puzzlement or amazement among most informed analysts of U.S. labor markets.”

“[To attract] workers, the employer may have to increase his wage offer. ... So when you hear an employer saying he needs immigrants to fill a ‘labor shortage,’ remember what you are hearing:  a cry for a labor subsidy to allow the employer to avoid the normal functioning of the labor market.” -1990 Congressional Testimony of Dr. Michael S. Teitelbaum

The U.S. provides employers with access to the world’s most productive workforce of more than 100 million individuals; an excess of talent and manpower far beyond the needs of any employer or field.  In the absence of interference with the natural wage mechanism, salary offers rise to the level which gives an employer, access to the share of labor he or she needs.  Organizations which lack the ability or will to compete in this dynamic market are replaced by healthier or more generous employers.

In 1998 we are again hearing that America’s colleges and universities are neither attracting nor producing enough U.S. knowledge workers in the form of scientists, engineers, programmers and information workers to meet the needs of business and universities.  In the case of programmers and information workers, the claim is that this is far more serious than a spot shortage lasting the few months needed to raise wages and train new workers.  Instead, some industry advocates have termed this a long term crisis which threatens the health of the U.S. economy.

Economists tend to dismiss such analysis out of hand as the alarmism of individuals who have, for whatever reason, failed to grasp the most basic of economic principles.  While the claims of ruin may safely be discarded as political theatrics, the domestic shortage claims deserve more scrutiny and need not be as far fetched as some market experts might assume.  Most economists would agree that if previous “employer relief” efforts have been left in place, a domestic labor shortage could well result.

Dr. Teitelbaum put this mainstay of market analysis in its simplest terms:

“[Proposed] provisions to rectify a ‘labor shortage’ have the perverse effect of assuring continuation of such ‘shortages’ “ -1990 Congressional Testimony of Dr. Michael S. Teitelbaum

Thus, if industry and universities are in fact facing a long term domestic labor shortage, the most likely explanation is that it is due to previous wage tampering in the skilled labor markets related to knowledge workers.

The natural wage rate in the U.S. economy is set by a simple right of first refusal (called labor certification). U.S. employers are free to hire any resident whether immigrant or citizen without regard to citizenship.  If no qualified resident is available, they may then sponsor (at some cost to themselves) a non-resident who wishes to gain a permanent visa.

As long as this mechanism is not abused, standards of living are not lowered by depressed wages in other countries, employers invest in domestic training, and enterprising institutions make tidy profits.

In such a market economy, employers signal a need for domestic talent through improving wages, benefits and terms of employment.  They signal a desire to avoid the high prices for domestic talent by turning to government in search of visas. Domestic workers respond positively to employers who choose the first route by leaving those who opt for the latter.

As workers are expected to bear the losses when demand sags, it is generally agreed that they are entitled to reap the benefits when markets tighten.  When employers use coded language like a need for “wage stability” they are indicating to potential employees that they favor a climate where workers assume the risks from market forces, but not the full returns.  It comes as a surprise to few that such employers may encounter more difficulty attracting domestic talent than employers who are unafraid to compete at the natural wage rate.

The purpose of this article is to argue that employers in government, universities, and industry, have recently lobbied [...] for the purpose of avoiding and depressing the natural market price for U.S. knowledge workers.  By creating a nearly identical panic to the one today, this group of employers motivated changes in immigration law and obtained government training funds to create an artificial demand for technical skills.

The following is a letter to Vdare.com, posted tonight:
______

Former President of American Engineering Association Says “Incestuous Relationship” Stacks Deck Against U.S. Workers

From: Bill Reed

Re: Edwin S. Rubenstein’s Column: Fuzzy Data, Flawed Economics Underlie H-1B, Outsourcing Enthusiasm

A wonderful article by Mr. Rubenstein!  Right on the money!  I have argued for a long time that China and India produce more engineers as measured by raw numbers because their massive population requires more — it’s as simple as that.  Rubenstein quantifies my theory.  The only thing I can add to Rubenstein’s column are two points that explain why so much misleading rhetoric about Americans who supposedly lack the adequate education to enter the IT profession.

One, there exists an incestuous relationship among corporate America, academia and the federal government.  Academia supports increased immigration at the student level, industry gets cheap labor from the foreign-born graduates and the government subsidizes both industry and academia through higher levels of immigration for industry and research grants to the universities while at the same time, encouraging more foreign students for the sake of diversity.  Some states give foreign students in-state tuition.  In addition, universities have unlimited numbers of H-1B visas available to them which do not fall under the current 65,000 cap.  Finally, Congress gets financial support for their campaigns from the IT industry in exchange for supporting increased immigration.

All of this interwoven chicanery comes at taxpayer expense.

Two, the method employers use to search their databases for job candidates is guaranteed to eliminate Americans.  In their job postings, certain buzzwords can tip the employer off that the applicant is American-born and educated.  Program language such as C++ or HTML, often taken from the latest courses at the U.S. colleges and universities, are examples.  If a prospective job candidate uses the wrong buzzwords in his resume, he’ll never get an interview.  Or in other cases, employers tailor their job search qualifications to foreign-born and trained applicants that would be unique to their résumés.

We all know that Americans are fully qualified to work in the IT industry. The problem isn’t lack of skill. It’s the deck that has been loaded against them.

Reed, who lives in Texas, is a former aerospace engineer currently working, he says, for less than a third of what he earned five years ago.  Among the projects Reed has worked are the Apollo space program, the F-16, the F-111, the F22, the F-23, the A-12, the B-2, and a number of commercial aircraft projects.

For 23 years, Reed served as president of the American Engineering Association.  In that capacity he has testified before Congress on at least four different occasions on various aspects of the non-immigrant worker visa as they affect American engineers and tech workers.  He also testified before the National Research Council in Austin, Texas, during their hearings on workforce needs in Information Technology.

Previous articles by Reed have been published in Manufacturing News and The Social Contract.

Prof. Matloff’s sticking up for U.S. IT professionals isn’t absolute, in the sense that he supports the immigration of Oriental and Subcon IT talent in cases where, he deems, such talent is of outstanding quality.  This support is a fly in the ointment, in the view of JWH: 

So far, so good. But…

“To be sure, the author is a strong supporter of facilitating the immigration of the world’s best and brightest. He has acted on that belief, by championing the hiring of extraordinarily talented researchers, mostly from India and China, into his department faculty.”

Thus, “the author” – despite writing a useful essay – is garbage. Is he going to pay out of his own pocket to compensate white Americans for the loss of genetic interests caused by the influx of these “talented” Asiatics?

And Joe Guzzardi has a little list of types of visas he thinks the U.S. could do without — and the visa meant for bringing outstanding foreign talent here, the “O-1” visa, is on it: 

O-1 visa, the so-called “extraordinary ability” visa designed for artists, scientists, and performers.  Another unfunny joke — which Rob Sanchez wrote about when he introduced readers to “Dorsimar,” whose “extraordinary ability” was to remove her clothes for money. 

You say you’re a legitimate talent?  God bless you, then.  We’ll catch your act over there — wherever that is — or buy your DVDs.

Hasn’t Computer Sciences Prof. Norm Matloff embarrassed the GnXp.com cognitive élitists enough already, with his recent CIS paper?  (Anyone know if they’re responded to it, by the way?  I wouldn’t know, as I haven’t visited their anti-Euro e-rag in five years.) As if he hadn’t already utterly destroyed them, Matloff is really rubbing it in now.  Sheeeesh, this guy takes no prisoners:

To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter

Interesting blog posting by Computerworld’s Patrick Thibodeau:  he begins by referring to my recent article showing that most H-1Bs are not “the best and the brightest” as claimed by the industry lobbyists, and asks why one would even investigate such a question.  Thibodeau says:

“H-1B visa holders aren’t ‘the best and brightest.’ It’s inside-the-beltway rhetoric that evaporates in two seconds of debate.”

Yes, inside-the-beltway rhetoric indeed.  Thibodeau’s remark fits well with the recent statement by Senator Grassley that I liked so much:

“Nobody should be fooled [by the industry lobbyists].”

I’ve often wondered how many people on the Hill actually are fooled on the H-1B issue.  I’m pretty sure that Rep. Lofgren, the House’s biggest supporter of the H-1B program, has a good understanding of the fact that most if not all of claims made by the industry lobbyists are false.  She’s been given lots of information by the Programmers Guild, including in a meeting in which she heard from them personally, and I know she’s heard from many people personally.  She even admitted once to the press that her neighbor, an engineer, couldn’t get a job.  But there is no way she would vote for, let alone propose, genuine reform of the program.

I’m told that the YouTube video, in which the prominent Pittsburgh immigration law firm showed its clients how to legally circumvent the green card law requiring employers to give hiring priority to Americans, really did have an impact on [Capitol] Hill. 

(Too bad they only saw half of the bad stuff.  Another video in the series also explained some of the loopholes in the prevailing wage law for both H-1B and green cards.  And too bad most of them haven’t seen the earlier statements by the law firm in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, assuring the public that employers hire H-1Bs only as a last resort after making an exhaustive search for American workers, that H-1Bs are paid well, etc. — in egregious contrast to what they were telling their clients in the video.  (See here.)

So, many of them do know that there are real problems with H-1B.  But they don’t WANT to know.  I’ve mentioned before that my own congressperson, Elaine Tauscher, refuses to meet with me.  And when another constituent suggested holding a town meeting on the H-1B issue Tauscher’s aide went through the motions of discussing it, but of course in the end Tauscher simply wouldn’t do it.  And she wouldn’t do it because she COULDN’T do it; both major parties are just too beholden financially to the industry for campaign contributions.  If any of you out there think that Sen. Obama or Sen. McGain will do the right thing about H-1B, think again; they’ve already said they support the program, that the U.S. “needs” H-1Bs.  (Recall the public comments by Sen. Bennett and Rep. Davis, quite explicit, to the effect that they know the public doesn’t want H-1B but the industry does, and as Davis — then chair of the Republican Congressional Campaign Finance Committee — put it, “The industry is the ones who give us the money.")

Back to Thibodeau:  For whatever reason, he apparently decided to take a look at my 1998 House testimony, in which I predicted that if the good jobs, e.g. software development instead of software marketing, were to go largely to foreign workers, American students would vote with their feet and major in something other than computer science.  As we all know, that’s exactly what is now occurring.  And, AGAIN Sen. Grassley’s line applies — “nobody should be fooled.” Don’t be fooled by computer science departments that tell you, “Enrollment is slightly up this year” — when they are hiding from you the fact that they lowered the bar for admission, that they relaxed the major requirements in order to attract more students, etc.

Kids are savvy.  They saw their older siblings decide to major in C[omputer] S[cience] as freshmen in 1998, in response to constant articles in the press saying employers are desperate to hire — only to find there were no jobs when they graduated in 2002.  The ACM, etc., are making such statements again.  Yet the kids know that earlier history, and moreover they see that salaries in the field are flat (which of course again is a consequence of the move to foreign labor, both as H-1Bs and offshore workers).  So why major in CS, even if the new liberalized major requirements allow one to take touchy-feely courses in human computer interaction instead of operating systems and parallel processing hardware?

Maybe H-1B is not the gravest problem the nation faces today, but it certainly is symptomatic of the general trouble — government of, by and for Big Business; disinformation routinely dispensed by politicians; members of Congress feeling that money politics forces them to take actions that they know are wrong and are harmful to working Americans.  A few years ago, when a representative or senator whose name I can’t recall now announced that she was quitting Congress to become a broadcast journalist [Scroob note:  Could he be referring to Susan Molinari?], TV comic Bill Maher joked that she was leaving politics in order to “make a difference.” Turns out that it’s not a joke.  I don’t know how much impact this person subsequently had as a journalist, but it couldn’t have been less than she had in Congress.

Norm

(These e-mailed newsletters are sent without the inclusion of URLs but I’m sure they’re archived at Prof. Matloff’s own web-site and can be referenced there.  His web-site is linked at his Wikipedia bio page.)

Notice GnXp.com’s whole schtick, that we have to import unlimited amounts of IT workers from China and the Subcontinent because our own American talent is too inferior to keep us on top of the field, is blown completely out of the water now.  Do they dare continue to mouthe that nonsense over there?

Professor Matloff throws Tamar Jacobi in an ice-cold shower just as she’s on the verge of giving herself another immigration-induced orgasm.  Hey, can’t a girl have any fun around here???  Not nice, Professor!

From same source as above:

Native-born White American parents tell their children not to major in engineering because they are fearful that their children will be replaced by a legal immigrant scab worker from China.