Also, they're only looking at resumes to determine qualifications. I'll tell you right now that we get a TON of bogus resumes from body shops, especially Indian ones. Make no mistakes: we have many qualified Indians, including management, but you get a ton of padded resumes that don't hold up under questioning. And yes, you do get those from everywhere, but the predominately Indian body shops can drown you in them.
I concur. Unfortunately, of all the job interviews I do, there's a strong correlation between padded interviews and the origin of the applicant. That doesn't say anything about the individuals from these countries, but based on the original number of applicants, a proportionally higher number of them will not get hired - their qualifications did not meet the requirements.
For applicants from some other countries, there is a pattern of not listing all qualifications they have. That doesn't mean that the individuals are better, but statistically, those applicants are more likely to advance in the queue after an interview.
This is not racism. It's looking at actual qualifications.
I couldn't care less whether you're green and furry, but if something in your resume appears to be an untruth, you're not going to get hired. If a higher percentage of Indians put qualifications they don't have on their resumes, a higher percentage of Indians are going to get turned down.
The recruiting companies have to take a lot of the blame, I think. Some, i fear i have reason to believe, suggests what the applicants should add.
But if your resume says several years of Unix sysadmin experience, and you cannot name a Unix vendor or OS name when asked, you're not discriminated against when turned down.