U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

[Guest.Visitor]

I am all for this too many people are taking American jobs and leaving us out of work.

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Tut tut tut... why don't you just build a huge wall around yourselves and stop anybody coming in?

[David Abramowitz]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Personally, I find a comment of this nature highly offensive. One needs to understand firstly that the United States is a nation of immigrants. Secondly that intelligent reform of an abusive policy is not anti-immigration, and thirdly that the L-1, and H1-B visa programs are not even an immigration issue because the visa holders are legally bound to return to their country of origin after the expiration of the visa. Fourthly, the propagators of L-1 abuses have been shown to be stereotypical exploiters of the visa holders. In some cases the visa holders were housed by their "employer" in substandard "dorms" that would have to be redecorated just to be condemned. Fifthly, this legislation does not eliminate the "L-1" program, nor does it modify the original intent of the L-1 legislation. That is the ability of firms to use their own employees to perform work for that firm, regardless of the national origin of the employee. What this legislation will do, is prevent unscroupulous individuals from setting up "body shops", and importing foreign workers who may never have had any previous affiliation, and then farming out the workers to other firms (where the worker is not the employee of that firm) at half the market rate, and then paying the employee only a tenth of that. Get an understanding of the issues first, and then you can tuttuttut till it comes out of your tummy. Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Like the bumper sticker says, "Welcome to California, now go home." Imagine if the native Americans had the technology and firepower to keep the "white man" out of America. The world would be a different place now. I expect that none of us in this forum would be Americans. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "clongley" wrote in message news:6ae8e941.1@WebX.WawyahGHajS... > Tut tut tut... > > why don't you just build a huge wall around yourselves and stop anybody coming in?

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

I know you were looking for a rise, and I am sure you are getting a few, just what are you trying to say? Would you have rather been an Indian? Should all of us still be in the stone age? The only reason any nation has every come to power is technology (best use of it) and firepower (again best use of it). Show me different? The only reason any nation will stay in power is their own use of technology and firepower, or another nation's use of same who doesn't use it against them. I'm not looking for a rise. I have stated a thought out theory of why things happen. I'd like to hear of some instances where this is not so? Back to tut,tut. Things really are simple, why don't you take the doors and windows off of your house and test out your theory?

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

I said, 'Things really are simple, why don't you take the doors and windows off of your house and test out your theory?' What I want to say: Walls are necesary if any entity is going to survive. Family, Business, Country. But, walls are not what is being talked about. Doors and windows are. A good wall is inpenatrable (I always try to work with good things, good work, good money, good toys, good walls). A good window lets you see in and out(when you want it to be so). A good door opens when I unlock it. A good family needs to have all three: wall, window and door. A good business needs all three. A country that wants to survive needs to have all three. So, it seems we all agree on what a wall is and what it is used for. Now on the windows and doors is where we seem to have the problem. A family, business and country need to have good walls, and control of their windows and doors. tut, tut

[J.Pluta]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

It's about stopping the loss of jobs to outsourcing, either through visas or offshoring. This is the TWENTY-FIFTH MONTH of the "recovery", and so far no jobs are showing up: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/...hes/P71569.asp ----- "Jobs were supposed to be the kicker to keep this recovery going," CNBC economics reporter Steve Liesman said, but those hopes were "dashed today." The unemployment rate did fall to 5.7% from 5.9% in November. But CNBC's Hampton Pearson explained that it did so because the labor force declined last month as "a lot of people simply gave up hope." Bill Sullivan, Morgan Stanley's senior economist, said on CNBC's "Squawk Box" that structural impediments to job growth remain, including high productivity, which allows companies to hold off on hiring, and the move toward outsourcing jobs. Folks, this isn't going away. Continue to hound your elected representatives to put in controls to curb the loss of American jobs. Abolish or greatly curtail visa programs. Disincentivize outsourcing. Outsourcing helps three groups of people: the CEOs, the outsourcing firms, and the foreign workers. Conspicuously absent from these gruops are American workers. Why do you think the big corporations are so keen to open up the trade markets to exports? It's because they know they're bankrupting the American consumer. But why should they care? They're willing to lose 230 million Americans customers in favor of gaining over a billion Indians and even more Chinese. You think I'm kidding? You might find this interesting: http://www.cspp.org/reports/ChooseToCompete.pdf This little group of CEOs - including Sam Palmisano - have come to the conclusion that "Buy American" is a bad strategy; free trade is required, and only through education can Americans compete. How convenient for them! While I agree that we need education goals, we also need to stop people like these from exporting American jobs en masse and lowering the competing wages to those earned by countries whose cost of living is 1/20th of ours. Joe

[GlenKerner]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

What you don't seem to understand is that some employers use the L-1 and H-1 visas to build sweat shops. It is almost like forced labor where they get paid but have to pay back more for room and board. Yes it is profitable to them but not to others. This of course is the extremes and I bet there are those companies that follow ALL the rules properly. Because your statement "why don't you just build a huge wall around yourselves and stop anybody coming in?" is in the second person I will presume you are not an American citizen. Think about this situation. You have been laid off from work because of cut backs. You are applying for a position at another company. You find out that someone from another country has been given the position and is less qualified. How would this make YOU feel? I don't think we are building a Huge wasll around ourselves. I believe that the government has finally responded to a major problem in the U.S. unemployed American workers. How would you expect any other government to react when their own citizens can't get work because laborors are being brought in from other countries. Shouldn't American jobs go first to Americans (German jobs to Germans, English to English, etc.) and then when there are no Qualified Candidates to look elsewhere? Just my 2 cents.

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Glen said: "I believe that the government has finally responded to a major problem in the U.S. unemployed American workers." Hah. The H1-B and L-1 problems are small potatoes compared to illegal immigration. Living in California where we give welfare to illegal aliens, give unemployment insurance to illegal aliens, give medical to illegal aliens and give jobs to illegal aliens it's become acute. We almost gave drivers licenses to illegal aliens. What a huge mistake that would have been. Yet, now our president is making deals with Mexico to welcome illegal immigration. We only complain about H1-B and L-1 in this forum because it tends to hit at the higher paying jobs, i.e. close to home. Yet there are literally tens of millions of illegal aliens that sucks much out much more than just jobs. But, in retrospect, we are all illegal aliens when it comes down to it, eh? chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Outsourcing helps three groups of people: the CEOs, the outsourcing firms, and the foreign workers. Conspicuously absent from these gruops are American workers.

Hey Joe, there's one group I think you left out: shareholders. And that's you and me and many, many others. Companies have to maximize profits to appease shareholders or capital will go elsewhere, stymying (sp?) the ability of the company to compete. The thing I can't figure out is how it all reverberates and settles out through the economy. It doesn't seem equitable when it's you, but is outsourcing good for the US as a whole in the long run? That's what I'm still trying to figure out. Although it's super complicated, I kinda don't think so for us in particular, because it means we'll have to work much harder to maintain our standard of living. But what's the alternative, and how do you implement it? Brian

[David Abramowitz]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Chuck Ackerman wrote: The H1-B and L-1 problems are small potatoes compared to illegal immigration I don't disagree with you on this point, but that's not the purpose of my post, and that's not the focus of this forum. My post concerns a problem that affects the iseries/AS400 worker. It is a problem that we can do something about, and a solution has been proposed. Rather than diverge onto other paths, I would much prefer all to write to their representatives supporting the bills as stated above. I should think that the broader immigration issue is another topic. A wiser man than me once said "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible takes a little longer." Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Trying to influence a wall, takes quite a bit of influence. But, we might have some influence if we try to tackle it a door at a time. Thanks to you David, for pointing out a specific problem, for which a specific solution has been proposed that has specific impact on me.

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

David said: "I don't disagree with you on this point, but that's not the purpose of my post," David also said: "and that's not the focus of this forum." I thought this forum was "Shooting the breeze." I understood that to mean anything goes. If you mean that wasn't the purpose of this "thread" then you may have a case. Unfortunately MC chose to use a web based newsgroup and it's almost impossible to follow a thread since threads, by convention, are connected via their subject. Most posts in the MC newsgroups change the subject to something that has no contextual meaning are disjointed and confusing. Sorry about that. David also said: "My post concerns a problem that affects the iseries/AS400 worker." Most all of the press I read, and it's confirmed by my headhunter friends, says that there will be a shortage of AS/400 programmers soon, very soon. While the topic at hand may be affecting the marketplace in the present time, I don't expect it to be a long term problem. In fact, as a manager, I'm concerned for the future of the AS/400. No matter how powerful, reliable and easy to use the AS/400 is, if I have a hard time getting support personnel then it's not an economic solution for my company. This has me much more concerned than the current soft market for AS/400 programmers. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

[J.Pluta]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

Brain said: Companies have to maximize profits to appease shareholders or capital will go elsewhere, stymying (sp?) the ability of the company to compete. ------- I have a problem with this statement. First, it only works for publicly held companies; there are plenty of privately-held companies that do just fine. Second, it seems that the drive towards 90-day profits and the rush of mergers in the 80's and 90's has created a network of mega-corporations whose ONLY measure of success is profit, and that this causes some bad strategies when viewed in the long term. For example, buying a successful company only to rip it apart and sell off its less profitable divisions MAY make sense from a 90-day standpoint, but the synergy between the divisions may have been part of the entire dynamic of the company (not to mention the fact that you're throwing more people out of work). Profits at the cost of jobs seems to me to be the point where the 90-day profit cycle begins to break down. Back in the "olden" days, a company was successful if it made some profit. The idea was to provide a good product at a good price, and treat your employees well. That's the epitome of the small business in America. Megacorporations change all that. Since a megacorporation has no real local presence (no roots, if you will), such a company is only successful if it makes maximum possible profit, even if that causes short term decisions with long term negative effects - including putting people out of work. Of course, the megacorporation don't worry about that because they have literally BILLIONS of other customers, and so if the American economy goes belly up, there are others to plunder. Why do you think "free trade" is such a mantra among the megacorps? And its not the shareholders who are getting the great benefit of all this cost cutting. Much of the "profits" of these companies are being eaten up by corporate perks and CEO compensation. CEOs are getting huge salaries as their companies declare bankruptcy and yet another "reorganization" involving layoffs in the thousands. If it was REALLY about the stockholder, then a company that has a negative quarter ought not be paying its CEO a million dollars. I'm treading a thin line here, but I am coming to believe that the concepts of the megacorporation and the 90-day bottom line are actually hurting capitalism, because it is a disincentive to long term growth. I know it's hurting America. Joe

[Guest.Visitor]

U.S. Jobs Protection Act of 2003

David, The U.S. has been ignoring workers for a long time. We old timers remember when manufacturing workers were being "down sized" (some of us called it "right sizing") with the technology and programs we were developing. Our attitude then was "let them get educated". It wasn't our concern that they found themselves in dead-end jobs. We thought, rather arrogantly, that it could never happen to us. Well, guess what? It is happening to us and it has less to do with the alphabet soup of foreign worker visas than the change in focus in how the iSeries is used. It just another server now. Nothing special. Now we are complaining and looking for protection just like the steel workers, auto workers, and others before us since the 70's. There are fewer and fewer businesses using iSeries as their main computer. The programming has shifted to other platforms and languages. How many of us scoffed when Java, Linux, Windows, and the web were being developed as enterprise systems. Now we need to know much more than RPG. A lot of us argue the merits of RPG III/IV/ILE, free-format versus fixed, etc. But what we should be focusing on is how to secure our futures by learning and using the latest technologies. Personally, while taking programming jobs in Java and web development, I'm shifting my business to provide other business services and not just programming. I've found a pretty good small business market providing accounting, bookkeeping, and tax services as well as computer services. It is us who need to change. We don't need more government beaureaucrats trying to protect us. You lose control of your future when you put it in the hands of the government. Tom.