Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

[T.Holt]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Ted wrote: I started a corporation & hired an American. David wrote: I fail to see how that alone will create a market for skilled American technical workers. You're right, David. I didn't have enough work to hire everybody, but I had enough to hire one person. I did the best I could. I think that you & Susan should hire some Americans too. Both of you have good hearts, and you would offer good pay, benefits, etc, without regard to the bottom line, unlike the big corporations. America needs you two & many others to hire people and put them to work, as I did. David also said: Here's how the L-1 scam works. Thanks for the explanation. You have filled a big gap in my knowledge. Furthermore, David said: It is the responsibility of government to protect its citizens. There is language to that effect in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Can you be more specific? I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I do understand the Tenth Amendment (the last one in the Bill of Rights), which says that any authority that is not expressly delegated to the federal gov't is reserved to the states and to the people. Can you tell where the Constitution authorizes the federal gov't to decide whom you and I can and can't hire? Also, the Declaration of Independence is not law, but I have the highest respect for that document & would be interested in knowing what portions of it you are referring to. But anyway, no one has yet answered my question, which is why you and Susan and anyone else who feels the same way you do wants the gov't to take away their liberty. This is why I jumped in. You see, I read day after day in the newspaper of someone who wants the gov't (usually the federal gov't, sometimes the state, sometimes local) to prevent him from doing something, and for some time now, I've been most curious as to why people want their freedom restricted. For example, let's say you're strolling thru the park one Sunday afternoon & you sit down on a bench to take a breather. There's a guy sitting there & the two of you strike up a conversation. You find out he's a computer programmer from India who's working for a Fortune 100 corporation. His family was starving, so he accepted an opportunity to come to the US and work. You give him the details of a challenge you're currently facing & he responds with an elegant solution that you had not thought of. Before long you realize that this guy would be a valuable asset to your business. There's just one problem. You can't hire him away from the big corporation that's exploiting him because of the law. So back to my question. Why do you want the gov't to tell you whom you can and can't hire?

[David Abramowitz]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Ted wrote: I started a corporation & hired an American. I fail to see how that alone will create a market for skilled American technical workers. The U.S. is in grave danger of losing a domestic capability for skilled technical workers. This is prevalent at Colleges and Universities all around the country. There are fewer and fewer "Computer Science" majors. In point of fact, on many campuses (campii?) it is a dying department. The cause of this effect is the misplaced greed and short term focus on the bottom line. The overall effect is a general loss of quality, greater time consumption, and ultimately the loss of the ability of the user to have input into the process, and personal customization. Without this, general productivity declines, and the short term gain is turned into a long term loss. We are a nation of immigrants, but immigration laws, and the ability to hire have been legally systemic since our nation's founding.The L-1 process encourages contracting and subcontracting of unskilled labor simply to enhance the bottom line. Productivity and skill never come into question. Just talk to investigators who post ads for different skills only to receive resumes for every ad from the same individual, with each resume showing a completely different skill. Here's how the L-1 scam works. The scammer will go to a foreign country and hire 100 workers to nothing for six months. The scammer will even pay them a buck or two. Then the scammer will bring these workers into the U.S. on an L-1 visa. Once here, they are hired out to other companies at prevailing market rates, while continuing to receive the minimum wage or even less. The scammer pockets the difference. Almost every company that uses L-1 visa holders does not hire them. The contracted company is only aware of the invoice, not the visa holder's salaries. The contracted company never hired these workers, and is using this loophole to fire American workers. It is the responsibility of government to protect its citizens. There is language to that effect in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Laws when well written apply standards to society that should enhance the quality of life. Think about that the next time you are in an elevator, and staring at the inspection sticker. Dave

[T.Holt]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Susan said: Companies are skirting around the laws, and I am tired of it. I think I understand that, Susan. Why don't you do what I did? I started a corporation & hired an American.

[nycsusan@hotmail.com]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Ted asked, "Why do you want the federal government to tell you whom you can and can't hire? " That's not what I am saying, Ted. I want corporations to obey the law. H-1Bs are supposed to be used only when they cannot find qualified American citizens to do the job. What is happening is companies are laying off Americans and replacing them immediately by applying for new H-1Bs. I have seen it with my own eyes. L-1 visas are there so multinational corporations can transfer their employees into the US easily. That's fine, but what is really happening is the workers are being hired overseas and immediately "transferred" to the US. There never was a job for them in India, Mexico, Brazil, wherever. L-1 visas are a way around the so-called limit on H-1B visas, plus as this article points out there are no salary requirements so the L-1s can be paid peanuts. Companies are skirting around the laws, and I am tired of it.

[T.Holt]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Why do you want the federal government to tell you whom you can and can't hire?

[nycsusan@hotmail.com]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Thanks for the information, Dave. Here's an article that goes into detail about what L-1 (intracompany transfer) visas are. This inpires me to write my representatives in Washington! "...The L-1 visa was originally intended for multinational companies that need to transfer key employees to U.S. divisions. But in recent years, outsourcing firms such as Wipro Technologies, Infosys Technologies and Tata Consultancy Services have stepped up their use of the L-1 visa to bring programmers and other professionals from India to work at the offices of U.S. clients. ... " "... The L-1 visa carries no salary requirements, theoretically allowing a foreign worker to continue drawing the salary he was paid at home while working side-by-side with or replacing Americans earning two or three times as much. ..." Here is the link to the full article: http://tinyurl.com/donm or https://www.amduus.com/cgi-bin/nph-p...5/BU268156.DTL

[David Abramowitz]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

I submit below H.R.2154 for your consideration. I strongly urge all readers to write to their congressmen in support of this bill:

---

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to prevent an employer from placing a nonimmigrant who is an intracompany transferee with another employer. (Introduced in House) HR 2154 IH 108th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 2154 To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to prevent an employer from placing a nonimmigrant who is an intracompany transferee with another employer. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 19, 2003 Mr. MICA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A BILL To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to prevent an employer from placing a nonimmigrant who is an intracompany transferee with another employer. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON PLACEMENT OF INTRACOMPANY TRANSFEREES. Section 214(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following: `(F)(i) No alien may be admitted or provided status as a nonimmigrant described in section 101(a)(15)(L) unless the importing employer has filed with the Secretary of Labor an application stating that the employer will not place the nonimmigrant with another employer where-- `(I) the nonimmigrant performs duties in whole or in part at one or more worksites owned, operated, or controlled by such other employer; and `(II) there are indicia of an employment relationship between the nonimmigrant and such other employer. `(ii) The employer shall make available for public examination, within one working day after the date on which an application under this subparagraph is filed, at the employer's principal place of business or worksite, a copy of each such application (and such accompanying documents as are necessary). The Secretary shall compile, on a current basis, a list (by employer and by occupational classification) of the applications filed under this subparagraph. The Secretary shall make such list available for public examination in Washington, DC. The Secretary of Labor shall review such an application only for completeness and obvious inaccuracies. Unless the Secretary of Labor finds that an application is incomplete or obviously inaccurate, the Secretary of Labor shall certify to the Secretary of Homeland Security, within 7 days of the date of the filing of the application, that the requirements of this clause have been satisfied. The application form shall include a clear statement explaining the liability under this subparagraph of an employer who places a nonimmigrant with another employer in violation of clause (i). `(iii) The provisions of section 212(n)(2) shall apply to a failure to meet a condition of clause (i) in the same manner as such provisions apply to a failure to meet a condition of section 212(n)(1)(F).'.

---

Dave

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

KC, Of course there's always the organized labor route. Ask yourself: Is the produce clerk at Vons, who gets $18 per hour, twice as valuable as the produce clerk at Wal-Mart, who gets $9 per hour? I'd say not. It's a matter of perspective. Is the $90k U.S. programmer worth 3 times as much as the $30k (or less) programmer in Indonesia? Maybe so. But it seems that some employers are willing to take the risk. I'm generally a risk avoidance manager and won't go the cheap route. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessary "KCM2" wrote in message news:6ae6ba8b.30@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | Chuck, | | Diversity is definitely not the issue, as you point out; it's non-U.S. workers, nothing racial here. | | Dale's note is great ammo for everyone to know and use when shortsighted decision makers only look at the per hr rate. | | I don't believe in bigger government either, and only in some instances protection/tariffs for strategic industries.

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Chuck, Diversity is definitely not the issue, as you point out; it's non-U.S. workers, nothing racial here. Dale's note is great ammo for everyone to know and use when shortsighted decision makers only look at the per hr rate. I don't believe in bigger government either, and only in some instances protection/tariffs for strategic industries.

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

KC, Ok, let's get my point clear. My stand will always be: Less government is good. I don't buy into the Democratic party's "the bigger the better" when it comes to government regulation. I will almost always take, as you say, the opposing point of view if it involves more regulation. You hit the nail on the head when you said, "high paying jobs." If we want to live in a capitalistic society, and certainly that's where I want to be, then we MUST accept the fact that the best value will generally always win out. Whether it's products or people, whenever something is overpriced it will eventually lose market share and eventually go away. I, under no circumstances, want to be in a socialistic or communistic society where the government props up professions that can't stand up to the competition. We all know what happens then. I, for one, will not be writing Washington on this. Now, having said that, I do my share. I've never entertained the idea of hiring H1B or outsourcing my programming. That doesn't mean I don't have diversity, though. I have Russians, Iranians, Koreans and Mexicans on my staff. I'm a strong believer in the rich and robust ideas and opinions that are achieved with diversity. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "KCM2" wrote in message news:6ae6ba8b.28@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | Chuck, | | Susan is making some very valid points and she is not spinning off on tangents. You seem to take an opposing stance at every issue just to disagree with any and all points posters make. | | You analogy on cars, textiles, and furthest from the point NASA doesn't hit the mark. With autos we still assemble them here with a big percentage of U.S. parts. Textiles workers aren't considered highly skilled. NASA has been addressed above, this is just goofy. | | The point is Offshore Outsourcing takes away highly skilled, high paying jobs that we need, nothing to argue here on this point. | | Counter points until people lose focus or the will to do something about is part of the problem. Please butt out if you can’t add positive suggestions to this real problem. | | I am in Mgt, and when I get the question posed to me who about using NON US labor my answer is always NO. These reasons stated in this forum along with communication barriers and poor work that ensues. These have proved my point. | | We should all do what we can to combat this period. Letter writing to Washington included.

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Chuck, Susan is making some very valid points and she is not spinning off on tangents. You seem to take an opposing stance at every issue just to disagree with any and all points posters make. You analogy on cars, textiles, and furthest from the point NASA doesn't hit the mark. With autos we still assemble them here with a big percentage of U.S. parts. Textiles workers aren't considered highly skilled. NASA has been addressed above, this is just goofy. The point is Offshore Outsourcing takes away highly skilled, high paying jobs that we need, nothing to argue here on this point. Counter points until people lose focus or the will to do something about is part of the problem. Please butt out if you can’t add positive suggestions to this real problem. I am in Mgt, and when I get the question posed to me who about using NON US labor my answer is always NO. These reasons stated in this forum along with communication barriers and poor work that ensues. These have proved my point. We should all do what we can to combat this period. Letter writing to Washington included.

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

I don't know about NASA. I do know that I had a momentary period of time in high school where I wanted to be an aerospace engineer. Then I got my hands on a computer and was sucked into the vortex! chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "David Abramowitz" wrote in message news:6ae6ba8b.26@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | Has NASA ever considered outsourcing the engineering jobs to individuals that they do not know? Are H1-B or L1 employees being hired as Aerospace engineers? | | TTBOMK even in private industry, there is a certain amount of security clearance required that precludes the wholesale replacement of U.S. citizens by others. | | Dave

[David Abramowitz]

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Has NASA ever considered outsourcing the engineering jobs to individuals that they do not know? Are H1-B or L1 employees being hired as Aerospace engineers? TTBOMK even in private industry, there is a certain amount of security clearance required that precludes the wholesale replacement of U.S. citizens by others. Dave

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

Scott said: "I am advising my young family members to not enter the IT field." When I was in college you could have said the same sentance but replaced "IT" with "aerospace." At one time, aerospace engineering was the hottest thing. However, even today, there are jobs for aerospace engineers. There will always be jobs for IT personnel, that's not the issue. What is the issue is making sure that you can rise above the crowd when an opening appears. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

Article: Downsizing jobs, outsourcing lives

OK. Here's my two pennies. I am not going to debate if outsourcing is "good" or "bad". I think that all depends on your particular angle. I will recall another thread which, I believe Susan made the point, that she had to deal with complete idiots at her outsourced division. Programmers who couldn't program, bilinguist's who weren't, schedules which were not met. "It's the quality of the work stupid"! The absolute worst thing about outsourcing overseas, is the complete lack of their understanding of the business modules, and programming procedures, we natively employ. This, coupled along with the outsourcee's inability to effectively communicate with their stateside department coordinators, becomes a real pain and detriment to a company's productivity, and employee morale. I think the real point here is, experienced, highly technical, programmers and administrators in this country, are being put out to pasture, while those of us remaining, watch threads in these forums from "Bombay Louie", such as "How do I turn on an AS/400"? And some of us, are actually stupid enough, to answer them.