India << US_Jobs

Chris Losinger

Here's a cheery article about jobs leaving the US and Europe for India. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_05/b3818001.htm This time it's not just programming jobs, but finincial analysis, medical analysis, architecture, etc.. sigh. *added* the worst part is that there's no reason, other than money, to do this. and, i'm sure, given the choice between 30% pay cut and 100% pay cut, many US and European programmers would make the 30% choice. but, htat's not how it works. cowardly managers would rather lay off a worker and hire someone else than ask him/her to take a pay cut. -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Anna Jayne Metcalfe

Sad to say it's true. At Christmas Prudential closed their HQ in Reading to move it to (I think) India...900 jobs down the toilet. Anna :rose: www.annasplace.me.uk

"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch

Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++

Chris Austin

Thats why I will never work for another publicly held company. You end up with PHB's cutting jobs and moving jobs just to inflate their stock value. I know it's "capitalism" but, companys making a profit should be penalized for cutting jobs because this greed is starting to hurt people. What Would Uncle Steve Do?. -Michael Martin

Kant

Chris Losinger wrote: Here's a cheery article about jobs leaving the US and Europe for India. Not all IT jobs. For instance Insurance jobs require you to be resident in the same state. Security and intelligence work is only open to citizens born in the US. I agree the salary levels in India are one-tenth that in the US. But you have to pay more for rent, electricity and bandwidth. Overall, the cost of doing business in India is 30-40 percent cheaper than in the US. From the article: Already, New Jersey legislators are pushing a bill that would block the state from outsourcing public jobs overseas. Government work can be outsourced but I don't think it's attractive enough. Kant Sonork-100.28114 Don't :beer: and Drive.

KaRl

Chris Austin wrote: I know it's "capitalism" It's pure exploitation. Humans resources, as they say.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

Chris Losinger

Kant wrote: For instance Insurance jobs require you to be resident in the same state just wait. as soon as the insurance industry starts to feel short on cash, they'll talk state and federal govt's into relaxing those rules. -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Chris Austin

I couldn't agree with you any more than I do now. The sad part is many people just don't see it, so they gladly work 12+ hours a day for a fucking paycheck just to be good little worker ants. Something here needs to change. I am tired of seeing good people being hurt by the coporate fucks. What Would Uncle Steve Do?. -Michael Martin

Mike Gaskey

Chris / Kant I can't imagine where the idea that Kant wrote: Insurance jobs require you to be resident in the same state Comes from. It may be a Canadian rule but it certainly is not a US rule/law unless it is a function of a law in some specific state. In either regard, it is not a federal law. Insurance IT is out sourced to India, Ireland, Malaysia and possibly Russia. Call center work for a couple (that I know of) major carriers is out sourced. If you as a policyholder call in for policy information it is quite possible that your question is answered in Indore or Nodia ( India ). I also know of at least one major carrier that out sources the underwriting function to India. In this scenario, you fill out an application, it is scanned into a workflow (imaging) system, that image and possibly other information from labs, MIB, etc. can also be sent as input into the underwriting process. This is in the Life and Health Insurance Industry, I don't have any working knowledge of what is done in the Property and Casualty Industry ( auto, home owners, etc. ) The number of jobs "lost" is incredible, both at the professional and clerical levels. This is not a direct function of profit motive. It is more a function of holding down expense, which allows a company to hold down product costs, which allows them to gain/hold market share. There really isn't much that can be done to reverse the situation. If one company does this then the others fairly well have to follow. This circumstance is excaberated because this ( life insurance )is a consolidating industry that is being driven by aggregators. The aggregators (large insurance holding companies) buy up the small or weak or "inefficient" or regional companies, which, by definition, eliminates jobs. Then to reduce costs so they can stay cost competitive with other aggregators they start shipping jobs offshore. The offshore problem will "eventually" self correct, but probably not until the end of your career if you're in your mid-thirties. My rationale is that ultimately the demand for offshore will out strip the available resource pool (or they discover cars and electronic toys) and wages go up until offshore employee costs hit a level, not necesssarily parity, where the infrastructure cost plus wages causes the work to flow back. Probably more than you wanted, but.. Mike

Chris Losinger

Mike Gaskey wrote: Probably more than you wanted, but.. nah. thanks. +5 -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Lost User

Chris Austin wrote: Thats why I will never work for another publicly held company Amen! :eek: Mike Mullikin :beer:

Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps. - Emo Philips

thowra

In the UK, staff cannot be made redundant in order to recruit cheaper UK staff. However, if the cheaper staff are based in other countries, this rule does not seem to apply. Surely, in the age of Globalisation, a mere difference in geography shouldn't mean that employers can shed staff from one area (country) using the excuse of redundancy, just to recruit cheaper staff from another area? The Government should investigate taxing companies heavily on profits made from overseas interests such as import tax on foreign products... I'd rather stay in IT than retrain as a plumber or similar so anyone else got any ideas? "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."

Stan Shannon

. "I still have faith that globalization will make us better off, but it's no more than faith." That statement sums up my attitude. Companies should be free to send work to the cheapest labor market. Let India have its high tech sweat shops. The increased economic efficiency in our economy will translate into more revenue being made available for new entreprenurial enterprise, which is what we are good at. If that doesn't happen, then our economy ulitmately collapses. When it does, no more need for high tech sweat shops in India and their economy collapses. And then we all start off back at square one. We are all linked economically, what helps one helps the other. We all sink or swim together in the same economic pool. The worse thing we could do is to allow the heavy hand of government to try to save our jobs. That would be the surest way of losing everything. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

Rohit Sinha

Stan Shannon wrote: The increased economic efficiency in our economy will translate into more revenue being made available for new entreprenurial enterprise, which is what we are good at. Stan, this was exactly what I was going to say, till I read your post. You guys have been extremely good at entrepreneurship, and I have no doubt that you will again do so. The problem is the distribution of money and resources. The extra revenue generated by outsourcing to cheaper places will not come to the people who just lost their jobs, but to the owners of companies. Good for the country, but not necessarily so for those just laid off. Stan Shannon wrote: If that doesn't happen, then our economy ulitmately collapses. When it does, no more need for high tech sweat shops in India and their economy collapses. Nah, by that time we will have advanced too, so we can survive that. :) ;) We'll have set up our own industries. McD's will have competetion from Haldiram, my company will replace MS ( :rolleyes: ), etc etc... Anyhow, the jobs from the US have only increased in the past decade or so, but we have progressed quite well before that too. For a nation that is only 55 years old, we have done fairly well, I'd say. Not that we couldn't have done better. Others have done much better than us in shorter periods. But they didn't have a long history of oppression and illeteracy. Anyway... I digress...
Regards,

Rohit Sinha

ColinDavies

Its interesting to note though that niche market insurance companies can still start up and blossom before the aggregators get to them. There are still plenty of unexploited anomalies in the insurance world. Regardz Colin J Davies

Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.

Rohit Sinha

Hi Chris, While I can understand your feelings to some extent, let me say that this is all a side effect of globalisation. You have your own company, so you know that a penny saved is a penny earned. And while there are "menial" jobs that are better done by people on less than one-tenth the US salary (better because it saves money for the same kind of job), there are also highly specialized jobs that are being done by Indians and others. Globalization has not only allowed access to cheap talent, but also good talent. From the article: This is no sweatshop work. Just two years out of college, Gaurav Daga, 22, is India project manager for software that lets programs running on Unix-based computers interact smoothly with Windows applications. It's wrong to equate low salary with low quality. Just that living standards in India are low, so people need less money. Just wait till that changes, and then we'll probably lose this advantage. Other developing nations will take our place probably, and the cycle will go on. I don't know how much time this will take though. Chris Losinger wrote: the worst part is that there's no reason, other than money, to do this. I think that's a good enough reason. But other than that, there is also the fact that you now have access to a multitude of talent, and can hire the best in the world, not just the best in the country, or your area. Chris Losinger wrote: cowardly managers would rather lay off a worker and hire someone else than ask him/her to take a pay cut. Now that's really unfortunate. But I have a feeling that many of them would rather leave the job than take a pay cut, in hopes that they'll find a higher paying job elsewhere.
Regards,

Rohit Sinha

Rohit Sinha

Chris Austin wrote: companys making a profit should be penalized for cutting jobs because this greed is starting to hurt people. This sort of protectionism reeks of communism. :suss: Those companies are making money, saving money. Who's getting hurt here? And do these companies have any kind of obligation to employ only US citizens so that they don't get hurt? If I owned a company and was forced to act against my financial interests, so that the people don't get hurt, I'd rather close shop than be hurt financially. Or maybe migrate to some other country. If a lot of companies started doing that, where would the country be? And where would the jobs go? Would you take comfort in the fact that at least now the company that laid you off is not around any more, serves them right oh yeah? At least now the money if coming to the country in the form of revenues.
Regards,

Rohit Sinha

Chris Losinger

Rohit Sinha wrote: Who's getting hurt here? i've been out of work since May. Rohit Sinha wrote: And do these companies have any kind of obligation to employ only US citizens so that they don't get hurt? no, of course not. Rohit Sinha wrote: If I owned a company and was forced to act against my financial interests but we aren't usually even given the option to work at a low rate. it's just assumed that US programmers are too expensive so we're tossed aside. my only consolation is that in 20 years Indian programmers will be too expensive too. -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Chris Losinger

Rohit Sinha wrote: I think that's a good enough reason only if you take it out of context of the rest of my sentence. -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Chris Losinger

Stan Shannon wrote: the heavy hand of government i'm not really sure where this comment comes from. i'm certainly not suggesting that GWB put up more protections; even though the same argument could be made for programmers that was made for steel and farming - it's a resource you don't want to lose. my complaint is that i was never given the choice between no job or less pay. cut my salary by 30%, 50% even, i'll still do the job. but companies don't do it that way. that's simply stupid. -c

A | B - it's not a choice.

ThumbNailer

Rohit Sinha

phykell wrote: anyone else got any ideas? Yes. Start your own company and outsource the work to me. :) ;P :-D
Regards,

Rohit Sinha