Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

[David Abramowitz]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

TTBOMK there has never been a study, or even a comparitive paper on the actual business analytical and programming skills posessed by Chinese, Indian, Russian, etc. individuals vs. people in the U.S. We do know that the Universities of India that produce programmers and engineers, do not offer a well rounded curriculum. i.e. The major subject is taught and everything else is excluded. Nor has there been a comparitive analysis of the number of programmers used in an outsourcing effort vs. the number of domestic employees that would have been used. IMO, this is where CEOs, CFOs, and even CIOs have been grossly misled on outsourcing. The sales pitch is the cost per programmer, and that's it! Only after the contract is signed, are the (very) highly paid project mangers, liasons, coordinators, and analysts accounted for on the domestic side. No one ever mentions that you need far more documentation, designers, analysts, etc. (per project) on the domestic side to make the outsourcing project effective. No one ever mentions that the number of programmers used for the effort will be (far) greater than the number of programmers that would have been used in a domestic effort. Here's the real hidden cost to a company: It is such an effort to put through minor changes, that user requests, design enhancements, and even basic spec changes are simply done away with. The form of personalized service where an individual with programming and analytical skills can actually talk with the end user and deliver a customized product are eliminated. Now if a boss talks to a staffer, and asks him why he's doing something in a particular manner, the staffer can respond by saying "That's the way the system works". This is called progress. Dave

[MCWebsite.Staff]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
** This thread discusses the Content article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
0

[David Abramowitz]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
An excellent article which brings hope to the future. It should be pointed out that the devil is in the details. The language inserted into any draft that would prohibit or regulate foreign outsourcing is crucial. History is rife with examples of legislation that had the exact opposite of the intended effect due to a misplaced word or phrase. It is also important that any pending legislation should be able to stand up to judicial scrutiny on the constitutional level. In the interim, the bills mentioned in the article are worthy of support as are H.R. 4829 and S. 1452 which would reform the visa process. OTOH, I am all for an outright elimination of H-1B at this point in time. I can not imagine how anyone could justify H-1B (in the present condition) without sounding comical. Evidently congress is no longer balking at the concept of elimination as opposed to reform. Whether or not it will fly is another story. IMO the bottom line is the point at which the legislator receives more individual letters, than contribution dollars. Even the most jaded politico will oppose the will of the contributor if there is enough popular support for an issue. Dave Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
Your article was informative and very beneficial. Thank you. By keeping us all informed of the many facts surrounding this IT issue, you have provided and I know you will continue to provide a great service to those of us waking up to this unhappy reality. Because this issue affects me and my friends in the IT community more than any that I have faced in my business life, I appreciate the attention that you are paying to this topic and I look forward to more. I know it was not your intention in this article, and though I do need the facts spelled out well as you did, I want more than facts. I know that I need and I think many more of us need a bit of unbridled emotional commentary on this issue. If you were Danny DeVito as the author of this piece, and Danny, were to say with that patented grin, "Did I capture his anger?" In this case, I would have to say, "no." I am angry that American corporations, such as IBM in particular are doing what they are doing and they are hiding their plans so they will not be discovered. As you know, IBM has been documented as having a gag order internally on discussions of offshoring so that the company does not become the poster child for offshoring in an election year. IBM does not want us to know. IBM would like to levy its devastation on American workers still be thought of as a respectable American organization. We may not be able to stop offshoring but we surely should stop protecting the images of the companies who are hurting us. IBM deserves our respect in that the company has been able to survive from the 1993 debacle in which CEO John Akers single handedly almost put the once mighty IBM out of business. But Lou Gerster's and now Sam Palmisano's success came at a great cost to the many loyal IBM people who got the pink ax in the name of saving the company. Perhaps it needed to be done since survival would make many change their ways. However, once Lou Gerstner stepped through the door with his resuscitation kit, IBM had to become a different company. It did. The "R" word disappeared. IBM could no longer afford "r"espect for individuals, whether the individuals were employees or customers. For its own recovery, a look at the company's earning mix shows that IBM lost about $30 billion in hardware business while it picked up about $40 billion in its service business. IBM is now the grand champion of outsourcing and its business is booming. Hardware of all kinds at IBM is no longer the lead dog. The impact of IBM's business model on IT workers is that if you are in an IT shop today, IBM would be happy to take on all the work of the shop and assign it to its Global Services unit. In days gone by, displaced IT workers were often offered jobs with the company who won the contract. Today, many of those jobs go directly offshore. To exacerbate a negative situation in IT outsourcing, IBM has also taken a lead position, as noted in your article, with Utility Computing. IBM calls it On Demand Computing. So, companies can theoretically just plug into the wall for al the extra computing they need. Thus, IBM and others to be fair, provide the information umbilical by which companies, hoping to reduce their own IT expense, can plug their IT infrastructure into the IBM outlet on the wall. On the back side of the umbilical, the information cord can travel thousands and thousands of miles to exotic outposts such as China Or Southeast Asia or South Korea or India, wherever the company can find the best labor arbitrage. Americans need not apply. As a potential displaced IT worker, you know what side of the argument you are on. If, on the other hand, you were a business looking to make more bucks by using the lowest cost labor, there are lots of outlets, especially on the Internet, where you can learn the tricks of the day. IBM and companies like IBM, with their outsourcing and Utility Computing models have made it that much easier for other companies and organizations to contract their IT projects with these supposed American Corporations, who launder the impact of the ruse. In essence IBM and others give American firms the opportunity today to practice offshoring while it appears they are doing business with stalwart American firms such as IBM, HP, Accenture, and others. Hey, they write their checks to IBM, not to the Bank of Bhopal. Thank you IBM. No wonder you don't want us to know! When you see the literature of the proponents of offshoring, there will be a few things there that, as an American, may make you want to gag. There are two especially offensive arguments that seem to be thrown out to the "cocky American's" who are now finally getting their come-uppance. One that especially annoys me is the following: "Americans are discovering not all talent on the planet resides in the United States." The other comment which I would even label as the new mantra for the pro-offshoring set is the product of the arrogance of American Corporations who now believe their right to prosper and thrive in America is intuitively obvious, whereas the rights of those upon who's backs their corporate gains have come have little or no rights. Carly Fiorina of HP used words such as these in recent testimony as she made her case that offshoring is essential for the health of the multi-national American corporation. After all, 60% of HP's business comes from activities outside the U.S. See if this doesn't make your blood boil. "The time's long gone when we could assume there was a God-given right to an American job. " Unlike Carly FIorina, I think that America is for Americans. If HP wants to declare itself a multinational company and act accordingly, then its status as an entity in America is diminished. If the HP company no longer wants to be American, let it make that claim. Americans run America through the U.S. Government. "Of the people, for the people, and by the people." That doesn't leave much room for International Corporations, such as HP and IBM, who choose to hurt Americans. For IBM and HP and all of the others, I have created my own mantra and I hope that it becomes yours also. "The time's long gone when American Corporations, gone International, could assume there was a God-given right to selling their wares in America, and having the protection of America for free." Did I capture the guy's anger?

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
BKelly1, You sure raised my emotions to think harder about Corporations that I have thought were American (US) but are now truly International beings. I agree, the USA belongs to the people who are citizens, we provide the manpower, the country provides the protection, the Corps that are American can expect that protection, the Corps that want to belong to another club can't expect the same protection.

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
Tom, this and last weeks article, should be published in New York Times or some other magazine of comparable quality. While not as eloquent as David Abramowitz of bkelly's response, I feel the need to respond. I've worked very closely with half-a-dozen or so Indians (in H1 visa mode) in the past 10 years and, quite frankly, their capabilities impressed me. And now with the off-shore issues, their capabilities scare me. Personally I believe America should let more talented foreigners into this country. I know they will work for less money but, believe me, once they get citizenship, they expect top dollar. The problem is that my Indian friends told me that they would "live like kings" on $10-$20,000 a year back in India. So what do we do? We punish them by stopping them from coming to our country for work but then reward them so they can live like kings with off-shore work. My personal response and my advice to all IT folks is to improve communications and leadership skills. That's what we have on the Indians. Even though English is India's national language, and most of their IT people probably scored higher on their verbal SATs than a large percentage of Americans, they are just harder to understand. So we need to use the small language advantage and close proximity to clients to our advantage. We also need to improve our project management techniques. No longer can we "deliver what you asked for." We need to use Agile and Extreme programming techniques. Those techniques, by the way, require that you provide continual feedback to the client and have a client on the them (full time.) Both of those items are much more difficult with offshore IT groups. We need to shake hands. We need to smile. And we need to ask "how are we doing.

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
I am absolutely fed up with the political games that have been costing IT workers their jobs! I was a contracting programming consultant and making a decient living-- nothing excessive. Then boom- the bottom litterly fell out. 2 years later I am going through a bankruptcy, trying to keep my home by the skin of my teeth, with a full time job. There never has been a shortage of IT workers -- just cheap IT workers! I don't think that IT workers with 20-30 years of experience should be cheapened that way. They/we have paid and earned our dues and are due respect! Personally I find that corporations that bring in H1-B workers or outsource are being very anti American by destroying American workers for the sake of more profit-- i.e. GREED! Mike D.

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **

Unlike Carly FIorina, I think that America is for Americans. If HP wants to declare itself a multinational company and act accordingly, then its status as an entity in America is diminished. If the HP company no longer wants to be American, let it make that claim. Americans run America through the U.S. Government. "Of the people, for the people, and by the people." That doesn't leave much room for International Corporations, such as HP and IBM, who choose to hurt Americans.

But what if those very corporations that you say "choose to hurt Americans" instead paid their workers what they've always paid them, despite the presence of cheaper competition. The companies would have higher costs, and consequently would not be as competitive and would generally lose when competing against those companies that can get the job done more efficiently. The "protected" programmers could lose their jobs anyway, along with the rest of those employed by the company. The companies would still be accused of "choosing to hurt Americans", don't you think? We compete in a global world now. Laws can't do much to change that. The Soviet Union had the ultimate in market protections, and they ultimately collapsed in the face of global competition. Brian

[David Abramowitz]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
Brian Singleton asked: But what if those very corporations that you say "choose to hurt Americans" instead paid their workers what they've always paid them, despite the presence of cheaper competition I believe that there is an error in the premise of this question. Notably in the term "competition". As any entity is capable of outshoring to the same source, it is not (at least IMO) a question of corporate competiton. Consider the hypothetical XYZ programming company in East Palookistan. This company may handle programming services for U.S. Company "A", and the direct competitor of Company "A" - COmpany "B". As both companies use the same service at the same price, neither is in competition. hmmmmmm there might be something in the antitrust laws here. Then consider the plight of third competitor Company "C". This firm:

[*]Hired only U.S. Citizens or green card holders.[*]Took note of the actual percentage of total budget used by I.T.[*]Did not have to hire extra coordinators and analysts to manage each project and project changes.[*]Has a quick turnaround of all user requests, and does not have to go through three levels of management to make a change.[*]Hires far less programmers than are currently working for the outsourcers.[*]Came out way ahead when an 6.1 magnitutde earthquake rocked East Palookistan and wiped out the data centers.[*]Has someone close at hand to take responsibility when things go wrong.[*]Actually paid less for I.T. services over a three year period than either competitor.[/list]The assumption that simply by outsourcing you are taking a more competitive stand is fallacious.. . . . . . . . . . .and IBM knows it. Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **

The assumption that simply by outsourcing you are taking a more competitive stand is fallacious

I agree David. The market will decide what's the most efficient way to get something done, and those that make the right (or lucky) choices will end up winning. Perhaps all the items in your Company C scenario add up to a reason not to use outsourcing. But that's for the market to decide, not the government. In my previous post, I was considering the case of international competition for international contracts. If companies on a level playing field use the same resources, nothing is to be gained - relative to the other companies - from using those resources. However, if Company A was forced, through legislation, to use more expensive workers, they would have to price their products higher to make a profit, and would lose when bidding against Company B. You might think "No way - they can't make a law requiring Company A to do something that Company B doesn't have to do", but in the world of international competition, which is the world we're in, that's exactly what government protection would tend to do. Regarding protectionist laws, I liked what Joe said a while ago about limited laws to give affected people time to transition. But ultimately, you have to rely on yourself to keep ahead of the pack. Brian

[David Abramowitz]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
Brian Singleton wrote: Perhaps all the items in your Company C scenario add up to a reason not to use outsourcing The problem is that in most cases Company "A", and Company "B" will never know. They are sold a bill of good by sales people, who speak the C-executive level language. IT is never consulted on these decisions so a fair and balanced solution is not one that is either sought, or decided upon. I don't know if there are figures on this, but I would bet that most decisions to outsource have been unilateral decisions. Dave

[buck.calabro@commsoft.net]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
> There never has been a shortage of IT workers -- just > cheap IT workers! I don't think that IT workers with > 20-30 years of experience should be cheapened that way. > They/we have paid and earned our dues and are due respect! Since I am one of this group (started 1978) I can't disagree with these comments. But I think we are obsolete. When so many American managers can easily decide that a 25 year veteran can literally be replaced by a recent college graduate, it is a clear sign that something is very wrong with the programming industry. And it's not the government; it is mid-level management. > anti American by destroying American workers for the > sake of more profit-- i.e. GREED! Again, I am in the 'primed to lose my job next' category. I used to think I understood the situation but now I'm not remotely sure. On the one hand, greed is the engine of capitalism. I have to believe that capitalism works; that I can improve my personal position in the world by dint of hard work and a little smarts. If I don't, then I might as well emigrate right now to one of the socialist countries and be taken care of. On the other hand, there is no way my taxes to my government should go to subsidize employees who will take my job. So I am mentally in favour of removing the government from the equation. But that leaves capitalist economics. And economics says (for now) that I am expensive compared to foreign labour. The nasty twist is that the outsourcers are beating us at our own game, and they are raising their standard of living as they do so. Emotionally, I can't complain, because if capitalism can work for them, it can work for me too. Right? The problem (which employers don't care about now, in the slump) is that _service_ will inevitably suffer. I say inevitably not as a slight to the overseas programmers, but as a slight to our domestic management. When was the last time you had incredibly detailed specifications to work off of? I thought so. Unless you work for a very large organisation, most of the project work is chicken scratching, some made-up milestones and a general understanding of what is to be delivered. It's the experience of the veterans which make this mish-mash come out alright in the end. I do believe that things will turn around, but it will take time, and I believe that the days of expensive programmers are over. We veterans who survive will be called on to write better specifications, test plans and the like so that the overseas programmers will be forced to deliver quality work. There will be some - perhaps most - who find work in other areas. I have to tell you that I am very seriously considering changing fields entirely - as a technical guy, I find it difficult to stomach the chores of management. You can see that I can't figure it out any better than anyone else. Clearly, the government will side with the large corporations, and they want to reduce costs. I can't see that changing to any major degree, and if by some miracle the government decide to clamp tightly down in the US, that would drive jobs overseas that much faster (where US laws have no effect.) For me, for the short term, I plan to market my skills to my employer as ferociously as I can; to demonstrate that I bring value to the organisation and also that I can (and do!) master new skills. For the long term... who knows? I may end up being a manager after all. Just in time to have entire contracts outsourced, management and all. Glumly yours, --buck

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
Mikd D wrote: anti American by destroying American workers for the sake of more profit-- i.e. GREED! One might argue that the American worker, accustomed to a larger salary than is justified in an open market may be the ones for which the term "Greed" could be applied. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
I am in a dilema too. I strongly believe in capitalism. I don't want government restricting it. I also don't expect 'my' government to give away the farm. How can we reconcile this? Maybe capitalism only works in a defined space where all the required laws of capitalism physics are present. We are evolving into a country of information, instead of physical products. What could it possibly evolve into next? Whatever it is it seems to be a ways off. I have visions of those sci-fi flicks with only a head necesary for the average person. When those products we used to make were outsourced, we gave up the jobs, retrained and now sell hi tech and information. We probably further justified this move by thinking we can always start making the stuff again if something really bad happens and greedily thinking we save our natural resources in the bargain and get cheaper products. If we lose our information, what can we do but lose it? If we send our ability to do business on levels such as writing the way we do retail business, customer service, medical decisions, business collections, etc....where do you draw the line, when is this not a good strategic decision? What happens when this line goes down? Where do we recover the information? Has everyone forgot we are in a little war here? Or do some think this is not true? Forget the economics, what about the idea of national defense? So,it is a dilema for me. But, one I don't think we should ignore.

[Guest.Visitor]

Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum

** This thread discusses the article: Anti-Outsourcing Movement Gains Congressional Momentum **
starbuck5250 said: "I have to believe that capitalism works; that I can improve my personal position in the world by dint of hard work and a little smarts. If I don't, then I might as well emigrate right now to one of the socialist countries and be taken care of." This is exactly the right attitude. To keep the salary we have become accustomed to after 20-30 years of experience we must continually prove that we are worth it. I find myself working much smarter, not necessarily harder, than I did 30 years ago. I work very hard at reinventing myself and my job on a continual basis. In fact, I make sure that I save my employer more than they pay me. I do this again every year. To do otherwise would be cheating my employer out of the extra pay that I receive over a rookie. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.