"And the company has also unveiled plans to open a software development centre in Canada which it said was a way of hiring talented people from abroad who would struggle to obtain a US working visa.
The Vancouver location would "allow the company to continue to recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by the immigration issues in the US", Microsoft said."
What keeps other companies from this tactic?
As of 2/28/05: 101 pounds since December 7, 2004 OFFICIAL THREE-MONTH COUNT: 112 pounds on March 9, 2005 OFFICIAL SIX-MONTH COUNT: 142 pounds on June 8, 2005 OFFICIAL ONE YEAR COUNT: 187 pounds on December 7, 2005 As of 2/27/06: 202 pounds "I've lost a heavyweight" As of 7/31/06: 224 pounds
Well, the one reason a lot of companies might not do this is the fact that they might not have the financial means to set up shop in Canada and then recruit people specifically to live in Canada to work.
Either way, it makes perfect sense from a business standpoint.
Originally posted by Eddie FamousWhat keeps other companies from this tactic?
In my department at work, we have some employees here on H1-B visas, and we always struggle to get the visas we need. However, it's not enough to justify the cost of setting up an office somewhere else. And, if we did set up an office in another country, there's always the issue of being able to work and meet with your colleagues. But, if Congress continues its inability to address immigration, I could see this trend growing.
"Teach children that they have great potential because they are human." -Warrior
You know, that's a pretty brilliant idea. It's easy as hell to get a Canadian citizenship (from what I've gathered) so why not take advantage of the idea.
I've seen EIGHT movies so far this year: Because I Said So - (2*); Borat - (5*); Children Of Men - (4*); Fantastic Four 2 - (4.5*); Knocked Up - (4*); The Last Mimsy - (4*); Shrek The Third - (3*); Spiderman 3 - (3.5*)
See, I thought what was bothersome was that credit card companies have always justified their exorbinant fees and rates because they were dealing with unsecured debt -- and now it looks like they are looking to secure that debt better but keep the rates.