Securing visas for (and hiring) foreign workers instead of citizens, in itself, is not criminal or wrong -- and absolutely the thing to do when the foreign employees bring skills not available locally.
The problem is when this process is used to save on salaries, favoring foreigners over locals on the basis of being able to pay foreigners less only. The article alleges (without evidence!†) that this is what happened.
Better headline: Cisco pays visa-holding employees less.
This proposed headline, IMO, is more likely to evoke the rational response (Cisco must pay its visa-holding employees a higher salary), rather than the irrational one (dey turk ur jerbs). Perhaps that's why it was not used.
† An average salary of $130K cited in the article matches the average salary of a good software engineer in the area. More needs to be said for the statement against Cisco to have any merit, in my opinion.
The problem is when this process is used to save on salaries, favoring foreigners over locals on the basis of being able to pay foreigners less only. The article alleges (without evidence!†) that this is what happened.
Better headline: Cisco pays visa-holding employees less.
This proposed headline, IMO, is more likely to evoke the rational response (Cisco must pay its visa-holding employees a higher salary), rather than the irrational one (dey turk ur jerbs). Perhaps that's why it was not used.
† An average salary of $130K cited in the article matches the average salary of a good software engineer in the area. More needs to be said for the statement against Cisco to have any merit, in my opinion.