Oracle files H-1B visa petitions amid mass layoffs (nationaltoday.com)

by kklisura 314 comments 521 points
Read article View on HN

314 comments

[−] rdtsc 42d ago
Wherever their major offices are look for newspapers in the small towns nearby advertising for "Software developers for Oracle" all written in the tiniest print, right next to classified that sell used bikes, car parts and other stuff.

- "Well, Uncle Sam, we looked so hard in US and nobody answered our job posts, we have to go to ... $othercountry to hire, there is no other way"

[−] pj_mukh 42d ago
Just to cut through the headline here. The largest chunk of Oracle layoffs were in India [1]. In comparison, they've barely fired any American workers.

Contrary to popular opinion, IT workers aren't interchangeable and there exist a large swath of jobs that very few people qualify for (HN should know this) because of the specialization required.

America is at near full employment [2]. Replacing American workers with lower paid foreign workers is already illegal and frequently enforced[3].

This is such a deep distraction but a virulent virus of a narrative, surgically designed to needle our reptilian minds.

[1]: https://www.goodreturns.in/news/tech-layoffs-2025-oracle-cut...

[2]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/269959/employment-in-the...

[3]: https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20180501-2, https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20180501-2

[−] saulpw 42d ago
From your first link, it says 10% of 28k employees in India were cut. I personally know several people who were laid off from Oracle this week (OCI). One person who's still there described it as a "bloodbath across our division" and says he counted 15k. I don't know what exactly he was counting but as we're in North America I am assuming they're all here. Whereas India layoffs were fewer than 3k. So that directly disputes your statement that "they've barely fired any American workers".
[−] janalsncm 42d ago

> America is at near full employment

Pretty sure that is the U3 rate which only counts people as unemployed if they are actively looking for a job. The U6 is better and rarely falls below 5%:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE

[−] toomuchtodo 42d ago

> America is at near full employment [2]. Replacing American workers with lower paid foreign workers is already illegal and frequently enforced[3].

Corporations are trying to hide job openings from US citizens - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45223719 - September 2025 (526 comments)

Job Listing Site Highlighting H-1B Positions So Americans Can Apply - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44892321 - August 2025 (108 comments)

H-1B Middlemen Bring Cheap Labor to Citi, Capital One - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44398978 - June 2025 (4 comments)

Jury finds Cognizant discriminated against US workers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42385000 - December 2024 (65 comments)

How middlemen are gaming the H-1B program - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41123945 - July 2024 (57 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42454509 (additional citations)

[−] darth_avocado 42d ago
Also to cut through the headlines once again. What the article actually says:

> Federal data shows Oracle filed for 2,690 H-1B visas in fiscal year 2025 and 436 so far in fiscal year 2026, totaling over 3,100 visa requests.

There is no proof that these people were also not part of the layoffs. Typically in layoffs, until the day off the announcement, it’s just business as usual. Which means people keep getting hired and H1B petitions being filed. The article doesn’t say they filed these petitions AFTER the layoffs.

[−] MSM 42d ago
Either I'm stupid or [2] doesn't actually say anything at all. It starts with "in 2025..." And later talks about how estimates are expected to rise in 2023 and beyond while referencing data that ended in 1988. What am I missing?

"In 2025, it was estimated that over 163 million Americans were in some form of employment, while 4.16 percent of the total workforce was unemployed. This was the lowest unemployment rate since the 1950s, although these figures are expected to rise in 2023 and beyond."

[−] smsm42 42d ago
I din't know which planet you are on, but on this one replacing is enforced extremely infrequently, and anybody who had to deal with the process knows it. Your example, where they catch the whopping 12 (!) cases - out of almost 100k h1bs per year - is only a testament of how small the enforcement is.
[−] mandeepj 42d ago

> America is at near full employment [2]

That can’t be further from the truth

[−] Noumenon72 42d ago
Your [3] shows that the government enforces paying H1-Bs competitive salaries, not that it cares about the Americans they replaced.
[−] pnw 42d ago
Oracle laid off 491 people in Seattle this week.
[−] iugtmkbdfil834 42d ago
<< HN should know this

HN does know. Some of us question whether brave and courageous leadership knows.

[−] patja 42d ago
491 Oracle jobs cut in Washington State isn't nothing
[−] rayiner 42d ago

> America is at near full employment

What America is full of is fake employment statistics that are artificially inflated by young people hiding out in school to avoid the bad job market.

[−] cineticdaffodil 42d ago
How does indian software indus try handle the llm wave?
[−] starik36 42d ago

> America is at near full employment

Then why does it take months and months for even experienced devs to land a job?

[−] to11mtm 42d ago
... Uhhhhh....

> IT workers aren't interchangeable and there exist a large swath of jobs that very few people qualify for (HN should know this) because of the specialization required.

You are stating what IT people understand and are blatantly ignoring the realities of many companies. I've been at more than one shop that decided to do layoffs in a 'corporate' way and the people who knew the system were let go, the people who didn't know a class from a function were kept around, and the smart people from other teams have to jump in and pick up the slack.

And that's not event getting into outsourcing/etc, that's just basic corporate stupidity.

> America is at near full employment [2].

Doesn't tell the full story, i.e. under-employment where someone's working at a Walmart with a CS degree; They're still 'employed' but it's not in their field.

> Replacing American workers with lower paid foreign workers is already illegal and frequently enforced[3].

A Single link to a single enforcement action only resulting in < 180K USD for damages is not a great example of enforcement.

Outsourcing companies prey on gaps in US tax code and the like to make it 'look' cheaper to outsource, except for the huge maintenance cost for the trash that comes out.

And, some of that is the fault of the company procuring those services too. They don't give good enough requirements, they take too long to figure stuff out...

And yet I've found a niche specifically around spending half of my day reviewing pull requests from offshore houses where, requirements be damned, it's obvious the contractor is either overworking employees, letting incompetent employees in, or the employees think they can cheat and put code that 'just happens to work under testing' but inevitably will break under any stress.

But at the end of the day you can still do it. WITCH consultancies have seeped into a number of our industries and all the average consumer can do is bitch about how every software product or interaction UX from the providing companies has gotten so much worse.

[−] dzonga 42d ago

> America is at near full employment

Hope you're not saying this at social gatherings.

What the newspapers(economists | politicians) say, is not reality for most people.

[−] noosphr 42d ago
If America was near full employment you'd be seeing real wage growth. Something that's not existed since the 1970s.
[−] luckydata 42d ago
If America is at near full employment why don't I have a job after looking for 6 months. This is a load of nonsense.
[−] bsjdjdkdkdkdk 42d ago
[flagged]
[−] raw_anon_1111 42d ago
It is not illegal to lay off Americans and expand offices overseas. I’m not saying that’s what Oracle is doing.
[−] ergocoder 42d ago
Stanford also filed an H1B this year to hire an IT person.

https://x.com/chrisbrunet/status/2037376353461567734

Apparently, no citizen wants to do this job? Why do we allow things like this?

[−] sethev 42d ago
I worked at a company once that posted h-1b jobs on a piece of paper on a board next to a restroom at the office. That was technically a publicly accessible area (if you had a guest pass).
[−] QGQBGdeZREunxLe 42d ago
It's always puzzled me that layoffs don't result in a temporary bar from using the H1B system like it does for filing PERMs with the DoL.
[−] MrWiffles 42d ago
What I’m not clear on - how many of these H1B hires are subject to the EO that jacked up the fee to $100k per person? Assuming even just 100 of them were, that’s still ten million USD (assuming I didn’t visualize the zeroes in my head wrong…), and a really large fee to justify to the board if you’re otherwise paying “roughly the same” in salary. Productivity is going to basically break even anyway after a few years.

This is why I’m wondering: did the EO get blocked, paused for judicial review or something? Is it even in effect?

No intention to make this political, I’m legitimately curious about the status of the law and its actual applicability here. Supposed to be such a steep fine they literally couldn’t afford to do this - not with them already going cash flow negative to build out AI datacenters. So either it’s not applying (why?) or somehow they’re justifying one HUGE fee and somebody is floating them one astronomical loan - which again, why? Where’s the profit in taking that big a risk? Seems absolutely unhinged!

We’re missing something here. Or, at least, I am.

[−] reenorap 42d ago
The title is extremely deceitful. They filed H1Bs for 2025 and 2026, but not after or during the layoffs from last week.

That’s like saying “Oracle hires tens of thousands and mass layoffs” (* hired during the pandemic)

[−] moshegramovsky 42d ago
I don't understand why American workers would support this program at this scale. Furthermore, I believe universities and other similar researchy/affiliated non-profits are exempt from the hiring caps.

I just cannot imagine executives at tech companies/body shops having any positive ethical motivations. More like "they'll do what we say without complaining or they'll go home". There's no way it's not just a hugely abusive to both pools of workers. The whole thing really feels like another example of the imbalance between labor and capital in the US.

Who originally wanted H-1B/etc? Rich people with money and power? Of course!

[−] BeetleB 42d ago
To all the folks here complaining that there is plenty of talent in the US to fill those roles:

Honestly tell me: Would you ever apply to Oracle for a job?

[−] avidiax 42d ago
I actually have applied, and I got the offer. And I didn't take it. Because Oracle is known for poor working conditions.

Why can Oracle continue to hire good talent despite offering poor working conditions? H1-B.

Is it circular? Absolutely.

There really should be a strict maximum percentage of visa hires for any particular job type at a company. Say, 2x the overall average for that job category, and never to exceed 30%.

If they still need more labor, then they need to attract and train local talent rather than relying solely on overseas talent.

[−] mikert89 42d ago
Where did my standard of living go? Couldnt possibly have to do with imported labor working around the clock under the threat of being kicked out of the country
[−] dwa3592 42d ago
Misleading title.

People who are wondering about $100k fee- it only applies if you are bringing people from overseas for this job; meaning if an immigrant is already in the country (eg: on a student visa), they don't have to pay $100k. It's just a visa change for them. There have also been murmurs about pay-to-play system, not sure how it works though.

People who got pissed reading the title- majority of the visas sponsored were last year and not last week's layoffs.

[−] jmyeet 42d ago
I personally think that doing a layoff of more than 2% of your workforce or 1000 people, whichever is high, should restrict you from filing for a work visa for a period of 3 years.

Or you can buy your way out of that restriction by paying each laid off worker 3 years of wages.

Pick one.

[−] reducesuffering 42d ago
If you want to hire an H1B and claim there is no American to do that job, what about the 30k employees you just laid off? None of them can do the software engineering, sales, HR, etc. that a company like Oracle works on 99% of the time? It's quite schizophrenic for basic engineering companies like Oracle, Cisco, eBay, Paypal, etc. to claim there are no Americans to do the software engineering they require after they lay off thousands and there are millions of American software engineers looking for work.
[−] pm90 42d ago
Oracle is a large company. Many of those laid off were outside the US. This is a non-story.
[−] cmiles8 42d ago
I would expect further H1B crackdowns coming. The $100k fee was just the start.
[−] hackthemack 42d ago
I find the topic of the morality or effectiveness of having a H-1B a little bit intractable to reason about rationally. Consider a simplified model of the system.

You have 2 countries, C1 and C2.

Scenario 1: C1 has enough demand for 100 tech jobs. C1 only has 50 qualified natives for 100 tech jobs.

The wages of C1 go up because there is more demand than supply.

Scenario 2: C1 has enough demand for 100 tech jobs. C1 only has 50 qualified natives for 100 tech jobs.

Now you put in a H1-B visa program that will pay the same as the prevalent wage as a local native. C2 has enough candidates to fill the other 50 positions.

The wages of C1 will NOT go up because now supply matches demand.

Is Scenario 2 fair? Who gets to decide what fair is? Given the above system, I think I would argue that H1-B visa programs cause wage deflation in C1, even if it is filling jobs that would not be filled and even if the jobs paid the exact same as someone working in the native country.

I am not dogmatic about that though. Willing to hear a counterpoint to scenario 2.

[−] smetannik 42d ago
Did oracle manage to circumvent 100k payment per H1B applicant?

Also, why they need to do H1B instead of just outsourcing abroad?

[−] thumbsup-_- 42d ago
Most of these would just be visa renewals. Though it wouldn’t be click bait enough to mention in article title
[−] simianwords 42d ago
This whole H1B debacle tells me that people don't like it when employees are not fungible but this sentiment only exists selectively.

The H1B i140 petition thing requires you to advertise the job before submitting the petition. How does this work if the employee is not fungible?

[−] lateforwork 42d ago
Keep in mind that employers have to pay $100,000 in visa fees (in addition to competitive salaries) for each H-1B visa. Clearly these immigrants are not undercutting US workers. It is $100K cheaper to hire a US worker.
[−] pvelagal 42d ago
H1B is used to hire the best talent that gets paid big bucks as well as cheap talent that is paid less. Both are true. It depends on the company.

I haven't seen Google or FB or Amazon or other top tech companies pay H1B any less. They get paid pretty well.

But firing people (some might be on H1B too) and hiring H1B at the same time is meaningless.

Btw, if you want to stop people from getting fired, J Powell needs to be fired. He is keeping interest rates high for any sort of hiring. These same companies hired like crazy during 0% interest rate environment.

[−] dgrin91 42d ago
What I don't get is, how does this economically make sense? Isn't there a 100k fee for h1bs now? So 3k h1bs would cost $300 Mil... Before you even start paying salary
[−] emodendroket 42d ago
All of these companies are hiring constantly even as they do layoffs so this is an easy story to write every time there are layoffs.
[−] sva_ 42d ago
They have many departments, and are probably reducing some of them while increasing the workforce in others. The idea that they hire 'those damn foreigners' to push down wages is probably true to some degree, but not the whole story. I also don't believe the majority of these H1B are directly hired in other countries for which there is now a $100k fee, but rather people who studied in the US under F1 visa who are exempt from this rule.
[−] alephnerd 42d ago
Meanwhile this March we saw 15k manufacturing jobs, 26k construction jobs, and 91k healthcare and education jobs added [0].

Those are the voters that matter (unionized, geographically spread out, didn't price everyone else out via remote work) - not SWEs.

[0] - https://www.ft.com/content/82c1795b-704a-4da3-82ec-2f9cd52de...

[−] e40 42d ago
I need to bookmark this so when maga nuts claim this never happens I have ready proof.
[−] slau 42d ago
I hate Oracle as much as the next guy, but this seems like a nothingburger.

Oracle didn’t file “thousands of H1Bs”. Oracle filed 2690 applications in FY2025 (Oct-Sep), and so far filed 436 in FY2026, according to the article.

If anything, this would indicate that Oracle slowed down on hiring foreign workforce. Oct-Mar is half of Oracle’s fiscal year, but they only filed 16% of the H1B applications as in 2025? That seems in line with a hiring freeze and subsequent layoff.

[−] intensifier 42d ago
They both happened in separate timeline. Headline is misleading.
[−] neoz 42d ago
Oracle laid off 12,000 people in India as well. What is this news on about? If all they wanted was cheap labor, why would they fire people in India and then also bring H-1B from overseas and pay them more?

This is just ragebait.

[−] fooker 42d ago
This article is deliberately written in a way to aggravate people who do not understand how the visa process works.
[−] kstrauser 42d ago
No. Abso-f'ing-lutely not, no way, no how. You cannot force me to believe that the talent they're looking for isn't available here already.
[−] OrvalWintermute 42d ago
H1B is generally a giant scam of Labor Arbitrage
[−] ojbyrne 42d ago
it would probably be useful to know how many of the current layoffs were people on H-1Bs.
[−] youknownothing 42d ago
This is unnecessarily incendiary, didn't get passed the first paragraph because this is so misleading:

> Oracle [...] has filed thousands of petitions for H-1B visas in the past two fiscal years, even as it lays off thousands of American workers

Oracle is laying off workers of _all_ nationalities, not just Americans. I know people at Oracle with H1B visas that were laid off. Trying to paint it as if they're replacing Americans with foreigners is just unnecessary fear mongering.

[−] Bratmon 40d ago
Abolish the H1B. Now.
[−] givemeethekeys 42d ago
Lawnmower strikes again.
[−] ericye16 42d ago
It's very sad how illiberal hackernews gets when it comes to H-1B visas and immigration in general. People will say that they are concerned about the welfare of H-1B holders because they can't leave their jobs but I've literally never heard anyone suggest an improvement (better portability, etc). Instead all anyone talks about is how bad it is that they have to compete against people from around the world. I think people are just afraid of a true meritocracy and maybe that's a bearish signal for the industry overall.
[−] jrkfofjw 42d ago
Don't worry, Trump is in Ellison's pocket so this will go through.
[−] frugalmail 42d ago
Sounds like Trump needs to add a $200k/yr premium to each H1B
[−] ryguz 40d ago
[dead]
[−] civitas_ 42d ago
[dead]
[−] jinglebell2025 42d ago
[flagged]
[−] throwatdem12311 42d ago
[flagged]
[−] timedude 42d ago
[flagged]
[−] zombot 42d ago
The MAGA crowd will be ecstatic. They get fired while their president's buddy gets to hire new workers that are cheaper and more susceptible to extortion. Be careful what you vote for.