Meta Must Face Lawsuit Alleging that it Discriminated Against US Citizens

But this is not just a new twist on reverse discrimination lawsuits. A deeper dive into the intricacies of how immigration and employment law interact suggests another reason – perhaps it’s not that Indian or (insert nationality) software engineers are just more brilliant than Americans.

Perhaps it’s because H1-B visa holders can be deported if they lose their jobs. This, the lawsuit argues, can make them cheaper to hire and thus potentially more attractive to employers. It may also make them less likely to assert their rights to be free of harassment and other forms of workplace discrimination. Rajaram focuses entirely on federal law, but the fact that immigration is not an issue under California labor law suggests that temporary visa holders may, at least theoretically, be better protected under California law than they are under federal statutes.

Highly qualified, not hired

The three named plaintiffs, Purushothaman Rajaram, Ekta Bhatia and Qun Wang, all U.S. citizens, submitted job applications to Meta between May 2020 and March 2022. They claim they were qualified for the positions for which they applied, but were turned down. In support of their argument that Meta discriminates against US citizens, they cite statistics indicating that Meta relies on H1-B visa holders for 15 percent of its workforce compared to less than 0.5 percent for the U.S. workforce overall. In addition, they introduced evidence that following a 2021 Department of Justice investigation into whether the company unlawfully favored applicants with temporary visas, Meta agreed to settle the case for $14 million.

Meta disputes the relevance of the evidence, but the District Court ruled that the plaintiffs had offered enough probative evidence to state a case and evidentiary issues deserved to be explored at trial.

Immigration and Nationality Act

While H1-B visa holders have certain employment rights under federal law, they do not have the same rights as US citizens. Federal laws, like the Immigration and Nationality Act, require that employers to pay the “prevailing wage” (not the “market rate”) to prevent the displacement of US workers.

However, H1-B status is contingent upon maintaining employment with the sponsoring employer. If employment ends, the visa holder has a limited grace period to find new sponsorship or leave the country. This dependency creates a power imbalance, making H1-B holders potentially more vulnerable to exploitation.

California labor law

California labor law provides robust protections for all workers, including H1-B visa holders. California courts and agencies have consistently held that state labor laws apply to all employees working within the state’s borders, regardless of immigration status.
H1-B holders in California are entitled to the same minimum wage, overtime pay, and safe working conditions as US citizens. They are also protected by the state’s anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws. The California Labor Commissioner’s Office actively enforces these rights, regardless of immigration status. California law also addresses wage theft and misclassification, which are crucial protections for vulnerable workers.

California, like most states in the US, is an “employment at will” jurisdiction, however. This means that workers who are not otherwise protected by the terms of a contract can be fired for good reason, bad reason or no reason at all. Sadly, the robust protections of California labor law are worth nothing if a worker is fired and removed from the United States.

Is it cheaper to hire H1-B visa holders than US citizens?

The perception that hiring H1-B workers is always cheaper may be a simplification, but there are three important factors that can lead to cost savings for employers.

• Prevailing wage vs. market rate: Employers are required to pay the “prevailing wage,” which is determined by the DOL. However, this may sometimes be lower than the actual market rate for specialized skills, especially in high-demand fields.
• Dependency and reduced bargaining power: As mentioned earlier, the dependency of H1-B holders on their sponsoring employer can reduce their bargaining power. They may be less likely to demand higher salaries or better benefits for fear of losing their visa status.
• Recruitment and relocation costs: In some cases, employers may find it more cost-effective to hire an H1-B worker with specialized skills than to conduct extensive domestic searches or pay for relocation expenses for US citizens.

US citizen discrimination lawsuit points to exploitation of H1-B visa holders

Paradoxically, Rajaram’s focus on discrimination against US citizens also highlights the converse problem. Temporary visa holders are vulnerable under US law and may be subject to exploitation and discrimination at the hands of unscrupulous employers. Solving the root problem might be the most effective way to solve the resulting issues for American workers.