Nielsen Collects FL Tax Breaks, Then Outsources Jobs 572
theodp writes "The poop is hitting the fan over tax breaks given to ratings giant Nielsen Co., which pocketed millions in Florida jobs-creation tax concessions but has turned around and dismissed hundreds of local workers after inking a $1.2B outsourcing deal with Tata Consultancy Services of Mumbai. Lou Dobbs is on the case. Lou may go even more ballistic once he sees the Nielsen-Tata pact, which assures Nielsen that OT worries are a thing of the past ('there shall be no additional charge for overtime work'), allows Nielsen to have unsatisfactory Tata hires replaced within 4 weeks of starting with no charge for the original or re-performed work, gives Nielsen up to 6 man-weeks of free labor when a Tata worker is replaced, and allows Nielsen to make 'any TCS Resource' disappear with no more than 5 days notice if their presence 'is not in the best interests of Nielsen.' Nielsen execs have launched a PR counter-attack, pledging not to bully 85 year-old ladies in future layoffs. In a Letter to the Citizens, Nielsen CEO David L. Calhoun explained that Tata won a 'rigorous competition' to get the job, failing to mention that Tata was also tapped by Nielsen EVP Mitchell Habib in his CIO roles at both GE and Citigroup."
Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what happens when a apathetic populace lets fascism or corporatism slide. Florida is well used to letting megacorps and others who let their money talk for them get their way. Accordingly, they're the first to be taken advantage of.
Florida's not the only one, certainly. The attitude of letting money talk is endemic all over the country. It's over the entire country. Corporations want cheap labor and will do what it takes to get it. They'd prefer slave labor, but compared to Americans, Indians are cheap enough to make the bottom line look good. Human rights mean NOTHING to them.
Unless the American people stop this, it's going to get worse. WE allowed this to happen. WE allow companies like Neilsen and Citigroup to take advantage of us like this. Accordingly, WE get reamed.
A Policy Suggestion (Score:5, Insightful)
No private company should ever receive special tax breaks or subsidies for any reason. Instead, just lower business taxes so everyone has a chance to profit equally. Then these sorts of things wouldn't happen. It would also radically reduce the cope for corruption.
(The only necessary exception I can see to this rule is for National Security-specific products and research, since protection the citizenry is the primary function of government, and in many cases (nuclear weapons development comes to mind) that nature of the product produce precludes recoupment if R&D costs in the private sector.)
You won't get money out of politics until you get politics out of money.
Re:People in India (Score:4, Insightful)
So are you willing to give up your job and your ability to feed yourself and your family so that more Indians can feed their family? If not, you've got no business saying that.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
There, corrected that for you.
Free market forces, along with the incentives in capitalism, says that the labour market shifts to where the labour is cheap. I thought Americans were fans of the free market?
(FWIW, I'm not a fan of the free market, and I'm not American)
Re:People in India (Score:3, Insightful)
In America, we software developers don't just program to feed our families. We also provide high-quality software that allows for our businesses to be more productive, thus increasing our standard of living.
In my experience working with Indian outsourcing companies and Indian-trained programmers, the quality just isn't there. And without the quality software, the productivity of our businesses drops significantly. And so our standard of living drops, eventually reaching a level as crappy as that of India. Frankly, I do not want that to happen.
BAD MODS! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent is not a troll. He's just telling the truth. When an Indian man always hires the same Indian company to do his work for 3 different American firms, it's ethnic/racial favoritism plain and simple.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
Free market forces, along with the incentives in capitalism, says that the labour market shifts to where the labour is cheap. I thought Americans were fans of the free market?
How do tax subsidies make for "a free market?"
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone in America will eventually be too poor to buy anything, forcing these corporations to target the countries they outsourced to, chasing the money. This will make room for new pioneers in American business & the cycle will start all over again.
I hope I live to see when this situation repeats itself driving corporations to the moon.
the laws of economics (Score:3, Insightful)
trumps nationalism
if someone can do what you can do for a cheaper price, the market gravitates to take advantage of that. not much protectionism will prevent that
people talk about politicians and laws fixing these things. there's not much a politician can do to stop the basic laws of supply and demand, there's not many laws that can be enforced against rules of economics without hurting the entire economy
the economy changes. protecting the jobs of steamboat captains or horseshoe blacksmith doesn't mean much when people start using trains and cars. you change with the world, adapat, and new opportunities present themselves. or you whine loud enough so that politicians protect your steamboat captain's job. which, under increasing pressur eof irrelevancy every day, loses its lustre and its income anyways, because the entire economy of steamboats is drying up
CHANGE, motherfuckers, do you speak it?
rather than complain about a job leaving the usa, why not train for a job that can't be outsourced? that makes more money?
you may now pillory me into oblivion. but go ahead. i hate you. i hate the story summary. to me, it represents the worst of the usa: fat whiners with a sense of entitlement. you're the worst of this country, the lowest character
i actually think outsourcing strengthens the country. it forces people to retrain. people seem to think getting one stupid job and entrenching yourself in that position for the rest of your life is some sort of nirvana. its not. its stagnation, mentally and financially. but it is nirvana for people who want to do nothing in their lives but shuffle paper on a desk and get paid more than their worth
change has risks. and plenty of people who lose their jobs to outsourcing will never get a job that pays that well ever again. such people are usually useless overpaid dead wood anyways. they deserve to work at mcdonalds, they got the higher paying job by mistake in the first place. and outsourcing is the rational economic change that shoves them down to where they belong on the economic ladder. of course they whine about that
meanwhile, anyone with any real skill and brains moves on, makes more money. the good float to the top, the shit sinks, whining and moaning the whole time. protectionism is for the weak. you're weak if you depend upon protectionism, you're the worst of this country. risk is challenging, it works your brain like a muscle. if you are too weak to stomach that, go clean toilets
those who whine the loudest, to me, represent nothing but the worst of the united states: "if i whine loud enough i get what i deserve"
no, asshole. you rise or sink based on your abilities and challenges are GOOD for you. they build you like rsistance to a muscle. or they kill you, in which case you are a weak loser who deserves no more than to be a grave digger
you don't deserve anything in life. you aren't entitled to anything. you work, you take some risk, you shut up and play the game called life, and you eventually make your mark. or you bitch and whine and moan about this or that not being fair. because you are fucking loser
now mod me into oblivion, you flabby whiny fucking losers at life. anyone with real skill is busy shutting up and moving on to better pastures and living their fucking lives. but anyone who knows nothing better, nor will know any better, than the jobs that were outsourced are sinking in their socioeconomic status, as they fucking DESERVE
fuck you flabby whiny losers. fuck you all. the worst of this country
Re:People in India (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, this is an oversimplification. Many Americans (particularly Republicans and Libertarians) are fans of the "free market" (as in pretty much 100% unrestricted and unregulated), some other Americans are for "fair market" instead (although what is "fair" is subject to debate). Then there are those in between.
The current state of affairs is however that the prevailing position amongst those in power (which is the only thing that counts in the long run) is that "free market" is a cure-all wonder solution to all economic problems and those individuals are ramming through "reform" after "reform" to that end. Those for the "fair market" are resisting any way they can (read: "feebly").
The situation is of course not restricted to America, as the same kind of forces are at play all over the world. It is the eternal battle between those who are, despite of their many protestations, sociopaths (i.e. see only themselves as the center of the Universe and all others as mere objects, to be used as tools, abused and discarded when broken, since the Universe exists solely for the benefit of its "center") and those who see themselves as a part of a bigger whole and who wish for that whole and themselves to exist in mutually-beneficial harmony where no one is left to fend desperately for himself alone and where well being of the group's members takes precedence over rapidity of accumulation of possessions. There are even those who schizophrenically attempt to have the cake and eat it too, i.e. they believe that if only the entire world was arranged with unlimited and unbound personal greed as its sole Holy Purpose, then somehow (by means magical and divine) the society would end up being the inclusive, mutually-beneficial "got your back pal" arrangement sought by the second group.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:4, Insightful)
More than half the time someone brings up "free market", they have no idea what they are talking about. A great deal of the time it's projecting an idealized version of what the market is supposed to be in their own heads, like the poster above you.
A free market is an unregulated market, with no government subsidies, bailouts, handouts, or funding, where the customers ultimately are responsible for the successes or failures for business based on whether they patronize them.
If this does not work, then democracy does not work, as it'll fail just as hard or harder for the precise same reasons--apathy, ignorance, malice, or what have you. Of course, market capitalism doesn't really make decisions for you, it simply allows more or less avenues and possibilities for you to enjoy or pursue, while government steps in and forces you to do something (or not do something) at the threat of punishment.
You probably knew that--that was aimed moreso at other people than you.
Re:the laws of economics (Score:3, Insightful)
My analogy is perfect: change. The internet means jobs are sent overseas. What can you do? You can't fight inevitabilty. Someone can do what you can do for much less pay. Go aheadn fight that. Fight the rise and fall of the tides while you are at it. Or go with the flow
And yes, retraining is hard, is not trivial. Absolutely. WElcome to life, it isn't easy
how would you ban it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you propose banning or highly taxing all imported goods? Even just sticking to software, that'd have a lot of consequences. For example, Ubisoft is a large French videogame company, with additional offices in Canada, which sells a lot of games to the American market (as well as elsewhere). Would you support protectionist measures that aimed to increase the market share of EA at the expense of Ubisoft? If not, how do you distinguish this case?
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't need to relax. You're completely right, and political change is usually effected by angry people. The Boston Tea Party wasn't held by people who thought they needed to relax. We need to start punishing politicians who do not support America - and the American people - first. You can bet the politicians in (some) other countries are certainly doing so for their constituencies. I have great respect for the Indian government. They're obviously working hard to promote the best interests of their country and their people. Our worthless, gutless, spineless politicians could learn a lot from them.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet calling all Libertarians 'hate-filled, poor-loathing' is fair-minded and liberal? I've always been amused by people who manage to reveal their hypocrisy in the space of one single sentence.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:4, Insightful)
BUT i don't think employment should be elevated to a human right. doing so only dilutes the term and makes real human rights seem less legitimate.
and here is why it's not a human right - someone employing you isn't something you need to survive, you can easily go work for yourself if you don't like what's being offered, or you can move onto the next 100000 jobs out there.
far too many issues get taken up as a rights crusade.
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed. This kind of capitalistic darwinism has gone beyond sucking the country dry and has passed into total economic terrorism.
Thanks to the rampant, selfish, gold parachute greed of the boomers and their yuppie hellspawn, I fear CEOs more than I will ever fear Al Qaeda. They can (and do) screw up my life - and the lives of millions of others - much more thoroughly, and they stand to gain much more from doing so.... and they have nothing to lose.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:3, Insightful)
Aw - that's the first time I've ever done the "I corrected that for you" meme... :(
As for fair vs. free, you can't have both. Free markets are unfair places to be, because nothing in the free market provides incentives for "fair". To get fair, you need a lot of market regulation, and then it's still not clear what "fair" means, as "fair" is subjective.
Case in point: Neilsen got their tax subsidy by promising to deliver 1100 jobs, acording to the FA. After the layoffs, there will still be over 1300 jobs, so Neilsen is still overdelivering on their promise. So why are the locals made? They're still up 200+ jobs.
Re:People in India (Score:3, Insightful)
Except the problem isn't trying to prove you're worth more than an Indian worker.
It's trying to prove you're worth more than FIVE Indian workers.
Ok, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Does that mean we also kick out everyone who has offshored to the US? When someone like, say, Toyota, wants to open up a plant in the US (who has 5 currently) do we tell them to fuck off because we are against offshoring? Or are we hypocrites about it and we are ok with offhsoring so long as the jobs come here. If that's the case, why should foreign countries allow that? Why not mirror image our policies against us?
Also how do you define it? Is it only offshoring when a US company moves jobs overseas? How about if they just stop producing something themselves and instead buy it from a foreign vendor? How about imports in general (where something is designed and produced in another country)? What about US companies that are owned by foreign conglomerates (like Blizzard, who is owned by Vevendi Universal)?
This is not a simple issue. We are well past the days where something was made by one guy and sold in one town. Global trade is incredibly complex. So if you are anti-globalism first you need to decide what precisely it is you are against. What things are ok and what aren't and at what levels (by levels I mean is it ok for something to happen inter state but not inter nationally). Once you've done that, you need to look and see what the consequences of that are. There is no action without cost. Make sure you understand what the downsides (direct and indirect) of such a thing would be, don't pretend like it's all roses.
Finally, doesn't it seem a bit supremest to tell everyone else "Well we got ours, we aren't going to help you get yours,"? I mean you seem to be all down on the rich in the US hording wealth, but yet you seem to be suggesting the US as a whole should do the same thing.
This isn't a simple issue, and thus if you think a simple solution works, you are probably wrong. I'm not saying what is going on now is right, I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm saying that you need to take the time to understand the whole picture. It isn't a simple case of jobs leaving the US, it is a complex case of trade becoming more and more global and more intertwined.
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would an American have been able to answer your question in 10 minutes when someone overseas couldn't? Are Americans just naturally smarter? I'm old enough to remember days before outsourced call centers and crummy customer service is hardly a new phenomenon.
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Karma be damned. Do you honestly think you are inherently superior to the Indian companies, just because you are American? I've worked with a few Indians, and they were just as good as some of the Americans I've worked with. Articles like this never cease to piss me off, because they never fail to paint the Indians as a group of imbeciles who can't code their way out of a paper bag. Your post really does not help.
What country they come from is irrelevant. Nielsen is exploiting a tax credit and in my opinion that constitutes fraud.
I wish they'd outsource the board (Score:5, Insightful)
How about saving some real money and outsourcing the board of directors.
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Karma be damned. Do you honestly think you are inherently superior to the Indian companies, just because you are American?
These firms derive their characteristic competitive advantage from their ability to exploit their workforce in ways that would not be legal in the United States, and this is what most people object to with outsourcing. Nobody's "inherently superior".
Re:Just Deserts (Score:3, Insightful)
There are definite excesses on both sides of the scale.
Mod parent Up, please (Score:4, Insightful)
This is more insightful than may seem on the surface.
Due to a history of mega-mergers, there is less and less competition among this class of corporate actor: executives and directors. Meanwhile they increase competition to insane levels among the working class, such that we 'compete' with people who could never show up at a rally outside the employer's offices and who have scant civil and labor rights to begin with (and perhaps even less in a trans-continental employment situation).
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, call me protectionist, and queue all the rebuttals, but it's time to just knock this offshoring stuff off. I honestly think it should be made illegal at this point. Banned. For good.
The rebuttal is trivial actually, there are 6 billion people in the world and 300 million Americans. 6 billion will almost always innovate and progress better than 300 million, and protectionism goes both ways. In other words in 50 years the US would be a backwards nation running on outdated technology and subject to, for example, disease the rest of the world had cured decades ago. The same argument then extends to natural resources or rather their lack of for certain resources (ie: diamonds from Africa, oil from the middle east and so on). Remember that if you ban outsourcing then you need to logically ban foreign companies that outsource (unfair competition) so you essentially need to close off the US from the rest of the world.
We are gutting good jobs from our economy at a time when we truly can't afford it.
Sure we can afford it, we're in a mild recession at worst and are generally doing quite well.
We are watching CEOs and other greedy executives make off with literally millions of dollars by making these decisions that take food off the table for countless US families. The people who lose their jobs to crap like this then cannot buy goods and services in America. Guess what that does to the economy? But hey, those CEOs have their mansions and BMWs! They definitely have the mansions and BMWs!
What about the poor Indian who'd be ecstatic if they could eat as much as a homeless person in the US? Are their lives worth less than that american family you mention?
My cell phone company uses an offshore support center. Recently, I spent 50 minutes trying to get two simple questions answered about my calling plan. .... This experience, by the way, has happened repeatedly with this provider's customer service. Note that my cell provider didn't lose anything - I'm locked into my plan, just like most other people who suffer from the cellphone cartels.
You're not locked into anything, you CHOSE to get yoruself locked into it because you're greedy. You and only you chose to take the cheaper option to save some bucks instead of considering the long term problems. I, for example, am paying more for my dsl access than my neighbor but unlike him I made sure beforehand that my provider isn't a stingy ass pos company.
I wish I could have spoken to someone in the US - someone who would then have money to buy stuff here, and who would have answered my question in perhaps only 10 minutes.
Why do you assume that they'd be as stupid as you and buy products from their own obviously stingy and inferior company?
Some people here would love to have those call center jobs (or those programming jobs, or whatever). Trust me, some people would really like to have them, especially now.
I doubt anyone would want a call center job unless they were masochistic or desperate beyond measure.
Darn it! Companies that made their fortunes on US ingenuity turn their backs on the US for a quick buck, and we continue to allow it to happen. It makes me sick and enough is enough. We are stupid, especially in the face of growing trade deficits, to send good jobs somewhere else. Wait, we peons are not stupid, it's the bigwig decision makers who AREN'T ACTUALLY HURT by the decisions. We should stop them. Congress should stop them. Which would be easy, if Congress wasn't attached to them at their wallet.
Interesting, yet you continue to buy services from companies that engage in these behaviors. It seems you're want lots of things as long as you don't have to spend a penny more as a result. Typical.
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:3, Insightful)
Letting the market work is not interfering as you describe. Once you start interfering, you have to do it right or you'll screw things up, since you're overriding the market's "intelligence".
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
so, the 'free market' is not good enough when you lose your job but it's just fine when a bunch of canadians or mexicans lose theirs ? Where was the outrage over the beef and timber tarrifs ?
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:1, Insightful)
The bigger issue here is probably all the tax cuts/concessions that they received to STIMULATE jobs in florida. Laying off most of the staff is not what you're suppose to do in this case.
yea (Score:3, Insightful)
take me for example. i have quit industrial engineering education midphase, got into computers, taught myself programming, started freelancing.
and without holding any degree, i am charging clients all over the world $40/hour for the work i do, and everyone is happy. they have to be, because they come for more. and that is despite im a turkish citizen, and turkey doesnt have a very good reputation on the internet.
so its basically down to the individual to make it or mess it. if you are talented, reliable enough you can basically work anywhere as an i.t. worker, including the middle of your living room, regardless of where you are on the face of the world. thats the magic of internet.
ah, but if you are wanting to get a 'secure' job at a company getting paid $80 a buck, working like how people worked back in 1960s, and make a nice living, you can forget it. those times are past, and globalization has nothing to do with its passing. the rising level of greed in all societies killed the reasonable understanding of work/pay ratio, corporations want to make you work more and pay less as people want to make more money and get more material possessions.
Re:the laws of economics (Score:3, Insightful)
Developing countries aren't as far along in this process. Wages and spending are lower. It's ideal for wages to go up there instead of reversing the cycle in the US.
It's not just IT, support, manufacturing and engineering. Foreign companies sell directly to the US, so its the management jobs too.
The huge trade deficit is unsustainable. A big recession in the US isn't going to help anybody, China and India included. It's reasonable to discourage sending more jobs overseas. Domestic spending is the way to create sustainable jobs in China and India.
Also, your attitude might work for venture capitalists but the world needs parents too.
Re:Hmmmm - interesting.. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you've never contracted through a third party before...it's common to receive a few bucks an hour of the billable time any other contractor you recommend to your agent or third party. I've made a dollar-an-hour "finders fee" for recommending someone that was later picked up by the client for every hour they billed. This is much like the bonuses at companies that give you a taste if you recommend another employee to be hired.
At the companies that used Tata, the same system was at the top level too. The executive at the top level that made the deal also got a small percentage of every Tata resource that was utilized. Multiply that by several dozen resources or more, and you can imagine the incentive to move as many jobs to Tata as possible by this executive.
Hmm, what does this sound like?
Bribery may also take the form of a secret commission, a profit made by an agent, in the course of his employment, without the knowledge of his principal. Euphemisms abound for this (commission, sweetener, back-kick etc.) Bribers and recipients of bribery are likewise numerous although bribers have one common denominator and that is the financial ability to bribe.
Examples of Illegal Bribes/Kickbacks
* A building contractor might kick back part of what he is paid to the government official responsible for selecting his company for the job.
* A pharmaceutical or medical device company might offer free training or other benefits to doctors who prescribe its drug.
* A benefit or pension provider might provide cash or another bonus to brokers who convince companies to choose their services over those of another provider.
So as long as it isn't secret, it's legal? Wow, if only the Mafia had figured that one out years ago!
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Somebody earning $1000 a month in India can maintain a standard of living above someone in US earning $4k-5k a month. So no, these companies are not explioting anybody.
Yes, but that is because they in turn are exploiting those who are poorer than they are (meaning cheaper access to the service and land sectors). A chain of exploitation down to the poor who will work for single digit $ a day so that they can survive.
So, yes it is exploitation.
Oh, and for those things were you can't exploit the poorer like buying quality or tech items like computers/cars, you still have a huge difference.
You can of course say that it isn't exploitation, but helping them by funneling money into their society. But the truth is, that as long as there is a huge salary difference for the same amount and type of job, there is exploitation going on.
And the grandparent was correct. These companies are employing workforce at below minimum wage salaries. Why are they allowed to sell products in the US?
I actually live in Europe, but I often have the same question over here. We have laws and regulations that offer our own workers protection, but then we go and buy goods and services from countries that don't have such protections. Isn't that the height of hypocrasy?
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
In my experience, Indian programmers tend to be excellent coders, who know the corner-cases of language specs and behavior better than most Americans, but they are very weak in the area of 'design'. I'm used to being tossed a paper napkin (if I'm lucky) and told to create a system. The Indian coders I've worked with fare poorly in that kind of situation, and need a fairly detailed design, that they can then implement quite well (assuming the design and requirements are not crap). This is not a racist statement, different cultures and different education systems, produce different strengths and weaknesses, go figure.
Re:Hmmmm - interesting.. (Score:3, Insightful)
My dear American Citizen,
the rules for the economy across this small globe are for a big part the way they are, because American policy and American interests made them this way to best serve America. You and your fellow citizens didn't give a damn in the past 40 years, if the the cards were stacked against coffee or banana farmers in some banana republics or where all the ore and oil came from and how it was produced - as long as you got it cheap.
Unfortunately for you, in the past years, clever and unscrupulous people across the world, specially in India and China, found ways to exploit those same rules to take advantage of America. This is very sad, about as sad as it was before for a good part of the rest of the world. And it would be only fair to quote you back all the helpful things uttered about this in the past by Americans, but that would be petty-minded.
So best get used to it and hope for the wind to change again. Whining really doesn't improve matters.
For example, with the rising oil prices, the production in China is becoming less profitable because transport will eat up the gains. A certain trend to move production back to America can be discerned. Once the costs of transport exceeds local production costs, Chinese factories could produce the stuff for free and it would be cheaper to produce locally.
Bringing back services might be a little harder, but here too some companies moved customer service back from India to the states, specially for people paying for the service.
Re:the laws of economics (Score:3, Insightful)
Well if that's the case then it would be smarter to be a blue collar worker cleaning toilets because those jobs cannot be outsourced. Only trouble is the pay and conditions of third world countries are being used to compete against first world countries and thus those conditions are being imported into first world countries.
What you say may be alright when applied to white collar workers where physical risk is low, but in the cases of heavy industry where safety is a concern it's simply not acceptable for a person to go to work in the morning and have a good chance at losing a body part or their life whilst working in conditions where safety standards don't exist. This is compounded by the fact that some employers *want* to have safe working environment for their staff but have to reduce standards to compete with companies that don't give a fuck if a worker loses an arm because it's to expensive to service or replace safety machinery.
I have been in work sites where people got killed because they didn't follow safety standards and it's pretty hard to retrain someone when they are dead or have lost their legs. Globalisation should be exporting safety and similar working conditions and compete based on the merits of the *efficiency* of the outsourcer not based on the gains of competing with a suppressed population who is desperate for any work OR with a country that has virtually Zero local investment in infrastructure and staff training.
And before you try to categorise me, I am 200 pounds 10% body fat and can't stand fast food. I constantly re-train and am smart enough time to have enough time to gather a wider world view. And frankly I don't think its a sense of 'entitlement' to anything that makes me wants to have a legal framework in place that *ALLOWS* companies to operate in first world countries *AND* provide opportunities to that same community.
These types of initiative's come from an executive that is absolutely gutless, where instead of reinvesting the shareholder gains of the 90's back into the business they were provided as shareholder return. Of course now shareholders have got use to that level of return they want it all the time until every quality business has had the core of capability replaced by a massive, flailing, incompetent middle management with absolutely no imagination for how to run a technology business and anyone who cares about what they do wondering when they will be outsourced, no wonder I.T is having trouble attracting new recruits. Just look at any large corporate and there you will see middle management there justifying why it should alter this cell in this spreadsheet every day. Management doesn't get sacked, nor do they have to retrain.
That dearth of incompetence that has no capability to build a business that plays to the strengths of it's strongest asset - it's employee's, and instead of these businesses having the capability to adapt to the very changes in the marketplace as they occur, they instead choose to strip the talent out of it, a very dangerous situation indeed when market forces shift away from even the sturdiest of giants, leaving shareholders and employees alike wonder what the fuck happened, and C level execs with a nice fat bonus for fucking everybody over.
Retraining my ass, this sort of shit is not building the technology industry - it's destroying it by scaring away the brightest enough to recognise that quality work is just not valued anymore. Fuck you for propagating that attitude.
Re:It's time to knock it off (Score:1, Insightful)
With your argument of 6 billion people, then the level of technology will be about the same all over the world but it is not. West is more advanced. Why is that ? Could it be that out of 6 billion people, not everyone can make an invention, that you need a certain level of education ? If you outsource your jobs, is there a need for your higher educated people ? In a country where everyone works in McDonalds and everything is outsourced, what do you think will be produced.
Boy, that's some curious exploitation... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, yes it is exploitation.
You have a very curious version of exploitation. By that scale, you could complain about the midwest. On average the midwest has lower wages than the coasts, but proportionally lower living expenses as well.
By your comments, you seem to prefer that the worker in india NOT get that $1k/month job. Honestly enough, this is an educated Indian, so he's likely to get another job. Maybe one at $600/month. That means he can't afford as much to pay for other trinkets - and the collective effect is more people stay at the suckiest subsidence levels.
You can of course say that it isn't exploitation, but helping them by funneling money into their society. But the truth is, that as long as there is a huge salary difference for the same amount and type of job, there is exploitation going on.
In my mind, your exploitation = willing trade. We benefit, they benefit, we're both happy. Realistically speaking, this will also result in a downward push on our wages(I think we're lucky we've been merely stagnant), and an upward pressure on theirs. If you look at the mean/median for India and China, you'll find that their wages have been increasing at far above inflation. Which is to be expected. This will continue until China/India have modernized and pretty much eliminated the subsidence farmer class. If shipping costs remain high, that will relax the pressure to outsource jobs long before that, but by then they'll have enough internal economy to keep the process up.
And the grandparent was correct. These companies are employing workforce at below minimum wage salaries. Why are they allowed to sell products in the US?
Free trade laws, they're being paid well above minimum wage in their country, and the cost of living is such that paying them US minimum wage would be somewhat silly in that you'd have telemarketers and tech support people making more than the local doctors?
globalization is of net benefit to everyone. It's just that, as we were the top dogs, it's of the least benefit to us.
Re:Hmmmm - interesting.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Xaxa,
India is a fine country.
I work with many indians and they seem like decent guys. For a while they were all superbrains but now they are increasingly average guys.
I look forward to the indian economy coming on line and you guys making as much money as we do.
The current situation is getting a bit intolerable. If *American* executives want to take up to 80% of their labor and have it work in other countries, without the labor protections of american law, then they should have to go live in those other countries and be paid the wages of those countries. As a SHAREHOLDER, I do no see why I should pay an american executive 70 times as much as an indian executive.
America is temporarily over priced. In part because of those executives efforts in pumping wealth and jobs out of the country, that's going to fix itself violently pretty soon. Once america goes into a hard bear market and has 12%+ inflation, you are not going to find a lot of sympathy for companies shipping jobs away.
Companies used to be part of the social fabric. We gave them certain benefits and they gave society certain benefits. They have changed the contract- the executive class is now blatantly looting both the companies and society for wealth and even screwing over the shareholders.
I think you will see some severe changes in response to this over the next 4-8 years.
Re:Just Deserts (Score:1, Insightful)
You appear not to be a native English speaker, so allow me to help you understand how our language works.
When someone uses a phrase of the form adjective-noun, it does not mean that all instances of noun are adjective. The adjective acts to reduce the scope of the noun. For example, if I were to say, "All flowers are not red roses," it does not imply that all roses are red.
I'm am quite confused by the modding up of your misreading of the original sentence, but then it's popular here to mod up anything pro-libertarian, no matter how off-topic or insulting.
Re:Inherently Superior (Score:3, Insightful)
"Even he agrees that the Indians, for the most part, are incapable of being creative and thinking for themselves"
And that's called "the inverse Ulysses syndrome".
"All of their work is performed in a "group" and they don't know how to do it themselves. "
That's exactly what is said about japaneses but see, it doesn't seem they are doing so bad on world economy.
On the other hand, India is well known for its mathematicians, hardly an environment for people non capable of being creative or thinking by themselves.
"Only a handful of universities in India are worth anything, the rest are diploma mills."
Maybe that fact that's exactly what (mainly) USA demands has something to do with it.
"You give it something, you will get back exactly what you asked for, but if it something outside of the realm of what was expected, it is not handled well."
Jesus Christ! they dare to do exactly what their contract clearly states! (that they are "do-as-I-say" drones, not creative workers). Chip their heads off, I say, chip their damn heads off!
Re:My experience at Citigroup.. (Score:5, Insightful)
May I know what are the ways these companies exploit their workers? For all I know, they pay their workers well, and people are happy to work in these companies.
To you, these companies may look as if they are paying their workers low wages, but the wages converted into Indian Rupee is a lot of money for someone in India. Somebody earning $1000 a month in India can maintain a standard of living above someone in US earning $4k-5k a month. So no, these companies are not exploiting anybody.
I live in Uruguay (another of the countries Tata outsources to), I work as a subcontractor for a very large US firm, and I earn less than U$ 1000 a month, so I'm VERY qualified to answer that :P .
Yes, U$ 1000 is a lot of money for someone in India (or Uruguay), but the "standard of living" stuff is relative. I can have food and housing that is probably equivalent or better than someone in the US making $4k, and I have a cook twice a week (!!!) but there are other costs that are international: I can't afford a car or gas or air travel, computers are costly and I can't afford a Laptop, forget about electronics or that LCD TV.. Plus, most of the imported stuff is taxed to death..
To be honest, most of what we can't afford is part of the "consumer culture" the US promotes, I can live happily without all of that, the one that stings the most is the car.
What I expect will eventually happen/what should happen should the "free market" be left to its own devices, is that the world's playing field will level off, and a professional will expect to earn about the same (adjusted for local cost of living) anywhere in the world. This serves neither the US (which will lose a lot of the buying power that enabled the "consumer culture") nor China (which would lose most of its competitive advantage of lower wages and would have to compete on quality and other intangibles - it will still probably be a little cheaper due to scale, but not massively so as it is now).
Of course, the market is not actually free, so the US will continue to hold back other countries with their one-sided trade agreements and patent and copyright monopolies, and China will continue to use their non-democratic government to hold back their people (I agree that no regulation would probably be a calamity if all the Chinese people had free reign to spend like they imagine US people do).
Oh, and I agree that those companies are not directly "exploiting" anybody in the sense that everybody entered into their agreements willingly, but they are using the loopholes created by their respective governments to bend market forces which would make these shenanigans impossible. (I think I came across as too strongly pro-market, I still think Government is needed unlike some extremists, but I think everybody can agree that governments are too big and often meddle too much where the best thing would have been to leave things alone - it seems all of this wouldn't have happened the same way had not the Floridan government given tax breaks to Nielsen)