Tweet
Everyone:
I came upon this article while perusing Yahoo! and figured it might be of some interest to my fellow 'Poly posters. As per my usual practice, it's posted below in its entirety — contribute to this thread as you see fit afterwards.
***
***
There are some quotes in particular that have my dander up. They are as follows:
That's what it comes down too, folks: lower wages and less job protection.
That crap about Asian countries investing more in their education and communication networks is just an attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that companies who relocate workforces to nations outside the Western world generally can get away with a lot more than they could at home when it comes to workers' pay and protections. Human resources are generally a company's No. 1 expense, and it saves big bucks when companies can pay less, offer reduced or no insurance and can fire employees at will with no recourse for those fired.
And don't tell me that the United States hasn't invested in its education and communications networks. We're at the top or near the top when it comes to that. Tell me again: How many medical breakthroughs does the United States produce each year? Technological breakthroughs? Useful inventions? Ideas? A lot, that's what. So, IBM, just admit the real reason for going to Asia: lower wages and less job protection for the workers over there.
We're doing our part. Still, it isn't enough to keep companies like IBM from moving their workforces overseas. When it was the blue-collar jobs leaving, we were told that the United States would remain competitive in the white-collar jobs. Well, now those are leaving, too. I guess that leaves us as a more service-oriented economy, and even that isn't guaranteed (just look at all the customer service jobs hosted in India). Unless by "service" they meant fast-food jobs.
You know what? He's right! We shouldn't begrudge India and China for improving their abilities. What we should begrudge, though, are the companies that use that as a cover to move jobs over there. It's just "icing" covering the cake, which is the real reason for moving the jobs: lower wages and less job protection.
Until that changes — and I really don't think India and China have any reason to bring about change in that area, let alone IBM — the United States and other Western countries are going to be hard-pressed to keep their own well-educated citizens gainfully employed. Well, unless they're willing to take cuts in pay, cuts in job protection and less employer-sponsored insurance. Then they'll be competitive!
Anyway, gotta run off to work, where my employer still values me!
Gatekeeper
I came upon this article while perusing Yahoo! and figured it might be of some interest to my fellow 'Poly posters. As per my usual practice, it's posted below in its entirety — contribute to this thread as you see fit afterwards.
***
ARMONK, N.Y. — IBM Corp. plans to move up to several thousand skilled software jobs from the United States to India, China and other countries, which could amount to one of the biggest such actions yet in the technology industry.
IBM documents obtained by The Wall Street Journal said about 4,700 programming jobs could be shifted overseas to save costs, a growing high-tech industry trend known as "offshoring."
More than 900 people are already scheduled to be told of the move in the first half of 2004, while another 3,700 jobs have been identified as having the "potential to move offshore," the Journal said. IBM already has hired 500 engineers in India to take on some of the work that will be moved, the Journal reported.
The division affected is IBM's Application Management Services group, part of Big Blue's huge technology services division. The IBM facilities where workers could be replaced include offices in Dallas, Southbury, Conn., Poughkeepsie, N.Y., Raleigh, N.C., and Boulder, Colo.
IBM spokesman James Sciales said he would not comment on "internal presentations" but noted that most of IBM's work force, which now totals 315,000, has been overseas for years. Sciales also released a statement saying IBM expects hiring in the United States next year will match or exceed 2003 levels.
While companies long ago began moving manufacturing jobs and other blue-collar work to Asia, big business is now increasingly shifting skilled work there as well. According to International Data Corp., foreign workers performed about 5 percent of information technology services for American companies this year, but by 2007, that share will grow to 23 percent.
Often, the American workers being replaced are called upon to train their overseas replacements. The same will be expected of IBM employees whose jobs are being transferred, according to the Journal.
In a speech this fall, IBM chief Sam Palmisano defended the practice of going to Asian countries for skilled labor, saying those nations not only offer lower wages but also have invested heavily in education and modern communications networks.
He said the United States should respond with increased investments of its own to remain innovative.
"China, India, South Korea and other rapidly developing nations are replicating the structural advantages that historically have made the U.S. the center of innovation," Palmisano told the Council on Competitiveness in Washington on Oct. 30.
"We can't — shouldn't — regret improvements in other nations' competitiveness. Their people deserve to participate fully in the benefits of innovations."
IBM shares were up 57 cents at $93.28 in trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.
IBM documents obtained by The Wall Street Journal said about 4,700 programming jobs could be shifted overseas to save costs, a growing high-tech industry trend known as "offshoring."
More than 900 people are already scheduled to be told of the move in the first half of 2004, while another 3,700 jobs have been identified as having the "potential to move offshore," the Journal said. IBM already has hired 500 engineers in India to take on some of the work that will be moved, the Journal reported.
The division affected is IBM's Application Management Services group, part of Big Blue's huge technology services division. The IBM facilities where workers could be replaced include offices in Dallas, Southbury, Conn., Poughkeepsie, N.Y., Raleigh, N.C., and Boulder, Colo.
IBM spokesman James Sciales said he would not comment on "internal presentations" but noted that most of IBM's work force, which now totals 315,000, has been overseas for years. Sciales also released a statement saying IBM expects hiring in the United States next year will match or exceed 2003 levels.
While companies long ago began moving manufacturing jobs and other blue-collar work to Asia, big business is now increasingly shifting skilled work there as well. According to International Data Corp., foreign workers performed about 5 percent of information technology services for American companies this year, but by 2007, that share will grow to 23 percent.
Often, the American workers being replaced are called upon to train their overseas replacements. The same will be expected of IBM employees whose jobs are being transferred, according to the Journal.
In a speech this fall, IBM chief Sam Palmisano defended the practice of going to Asian countries for skilled labor, saying those nations not only offer lower wages but also have invested heavily in education and modern communications networks.
He said the United States should respond with increased investments of its own to remain innovative.
"China, India, South Korea and other rapidly developing nations are replicating the structural advantages that historically have made the U.S. the center of innovation," Palmisano told the Council on Competitiveness in Washington on Oct. 30.
"We can't — shouldn't — regret improvements in other nations' competitiveness. Their people deserve to participate fully in the benefits of innovations."
IBM shares were up 57 cents at $93.28 in trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.
There are some quotes in particular that have my dander up. They are as follows:
In a speech this fall, IBM chief Sam Palmisano defended the practice of going to Asian countries for skilled labor, saying those nations not only offer lower wages but also have invested heavily in education and modern communications networks.
That crap about Asian countries investing more in their education and communication networks is just an attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that companies who relocate workforces to nations outside the Western world generally can get away with a lot more than they could at home when it comes to workers' pay and protections. Human resources are generally a company's No. 1 expense, and it saves big bucks when companies can pay less, offer reduced or no insurance and can fire employees at will with no recourse for those fired.
And don't tell me that the United States hasn't invested in its education and communications networks. We're at the top or near the top when it comes to that. Tell me again: How many medical breakthroughs does the United States produce each year? Technological breakthroughs? Useful inventions? Ideas? A lot, that's what. So, IBM, just admit the real reason for going to Asia: lower wages and less job protection for the workers over there.
He said the United States should respond with increased investments of its own to remain innovative.
"We can't — shouldn't — regret improvements in other nations' competitiveness. Their people deserve to participate fully in the benefits of innovations."
Until that changes — and I really don't think India and China have any reason to bring about change in that area, let alone IBM — the United States and other Western countries are going to be hard-pressed to keep their own well-educated citizens gainfully employed. Well, unless they're willing to take cuts in pay, cuts in job protection and less employer-sponsored insurance. Then they'll be competitive!
Anyway, gotta run off to work, where my employer still values me!
Gatekeeper
But don't even give me the "No they aren't!" line...I mean, the gap between American intelligence and Asian intelligence is astonishing.
But then again, we all know the US is known for it's shutborder policy 
Comment