Re: What job cannot be outsourced overseas?

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:00:00 -0800, The Orchardist
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Hmmm. and after they outsource most of the decent paying jobs, exactly
>who will be left that can PAY  for all of these "services" from fellow
>Americans ?!
>
Chuckle, Geez guy, an interesting statement.

Not what we were discussing, exactly, but interesting.

Hmmm.  How do you propose we fix that problem?

I suppose we could put tariifs in place to artificially inflate fair
world market prices for things so as to make it seem as if we're more
competitive in something we currently are not.

Oops ... I just remembered.  We did that already, didn't we?  And it
seems it turned into one of those deals where a good intentioned thing
had unintended consequences.  I'm talking about the steel tariffs that
were put in place at the insistance of the Union and good intentioned
Politians (who'd pimp their own mothers if they thought it'd get em a
vote), in an effort to protect American jobs.  The jobs of the steel
makers.  

Unfortunately, there are also people who are steel -users- in the U.S.
Companies who make things out of steel.  Yah know, make parts and
things out of steel.  Which they sell.  Just for the record, there are
something like 59 workers in 'steel using manufacturing' jobs for each
worker in the 'steel making' business.

To quote:

"In a study done for the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition,
economists Joseph Francois and Laura Baughman calculate there were
200,000 lost jobs in the United States in 2002 due to higher steel
prices as a result of the tariff and that the lost jobs amount to
nearly $4 billion in lost wages from February to November 2002. 

The 200,000 lost jobs is a higher number than the entire number of
people employed in the steel-producing industry."

For further reading on what the "Unintended Consequences" might be as
result of using tariffs, or any artificial means of making Americans
seem more competitive in an open market, you might want to do some
reading.  These are about the tariffs that were used to try to
"protect" American jobs in steel making.  But what seems to have
happened is that one group was protected, at the expense of another
American group.  The one who paid the price, was the group which had
been successfully competing against foreign competitors.

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed093003b.cfm

with these two yah gotta click on 'Transcript' at the bottom of the
first page:

http://www.house.gov/smbiz/hearings/107th/2002/020723/index.html

http://www.house.gov/smbiz/hearings/107th/2002/020925/index.html

This particular issue came to my mind because I personally know some
of the folks here in Minnesota adversely affected by that tariff

Is the outsourcing of jobs a problem?

Well, I'm no expert, but my answer would be 'Yes'.

Of course that part is easy.  Any half intelligent baboon could figure
that much out.

The MUCH harder part is to figure out a workable solution or
resolution.  With the emphasis on 'WORKABLE'.

Keeping in mind that we live in a world with a lot of other people.
People from whom we buy things, but also people to whom we sell
things.  Yah gotta keep that in mind, because if we do not allow them
to sell here, often they will not buy our stuff. either.

Also keeping in mind things like the fact that those guys and gals in
India, for instance, who are the ones answering phone calls or on-line
requests for assistance by AOL customers.  Are also helping AOL stay
in business. And ... AOL does employ Americans, also, yah know.  Quite
a lot of them.  Not to mention a lot of ordinary, as well as wealthy,
Americans own AOL stock and could use the money they might make if the
corporation remains successful.  In a world full of competitiors.

Also one must keep in mind that outsourcing is nothing particularly
new.

i.e. Over the past decade or more, a fair number of the Greater Twin
Cities metropolitan area manufacturing jobs have moved, to Greater
Minnesota (out in the sticks).  The reason?  The very same reason that
some work now is being outsourced to Indonesia, the Philippines, and
India.  There are available workers, often reasonably well educated
and highly motivated, who will do the same job as their city counter
parts, for less money.  Who WANT the work.  Show up on time, do a good
days work, and do it well.  Absenteeism, turnover rates, etc are often
lower.  And as the local cost of living is lower, those particular
employees see the jobs as good ones.  Often paying a bit more than
what they'd been making.  So while on the grand scale of things, at
state and federal levels it's reported that there is a loss in wages,
new jobs are paying less ... as compared to old job back in the
Cities.  Locally, it's a good deal for all and more income than what
they were getting before.  Of course, the city cousins who lost the
jobs to their country/small town cousins are NOT happy.

This is an issue of constant talk around the Twin Cities.  Some of
those Greater Minnesota cities and towns are actively wooing and
competing to get businesses to move their way. Offering everything
from tax incentives, to financial loan aids, to building em a custom
road if that's what needed, and so forth.

I am personally familiar with several such instances. i.e. A branch of
a major, nation wide corporation which relocated to the north woods of
Minnesota.  Granted, not a huge branch. Only a few hundred employees,
out of a corporation which employs thousands.  But the local economy
and infrastructure wouldn't really support more, all of a sudden.  But
was capable of supporting that branch.  Adequate workers in that area
with pre-requisite knowledge and skills. 

Just because they're "country bumpkins", and prefer going hunting and
ice fishing to going to the latest in-style and fad night clubs and
such, doesn't mean they're ignorant or uneducated.  In fact I know the
gal who was sent by the national headquarters of that corporation to
start up this local operation.  She was surprised during interview
operations and such at just how well many of the locals were educated,
on average ... in her observation and opinion, better than she'd seen
elsewhere. Keeping in mind she was hiring from lower level help to
upper crust help. She stated that among other things she'd initially
thought she'd need to import some high level talent from back in the
highly paid, big urban areas.  In things like IT, computer graphics
work, an MBA or 2 with needed higher level business and management
skills, and so forth.  And had thought that'd be a problem.  She'd
have to offer incentives, generous relocation allowances, and so
forth. Instead she found qualified and interested talent locally.  

Not only that, but based on local cost of living, salary structure and
so forth, she found guys and gals more than willing to work for
$30,000 where same job commanded $45-$50 K elsewhere; $45-$55 K
instead of $75 K plus elsewhere, etc. And found out that those folks
could live quite nicely on the local economy at those rates.  Were
more than happy for the jobs.  Considered selves lucky and fortunate.
Good paying jobs, as far as they were concerned, and yet they could
stay the small town north woods dwellers they preferred to be.  

The lady also mentioned she had to get used to the idea of a
programmer, commercial graphics artist, or marketing expert showing up
for work in the morning in pickup or SUV, wearing camo outfit, and
with a deer strapped to the hood or in back of his truck.  Guy'd been
hunting and had to quickly shift from camo outfit to suit, or slacks,
dress shirt, and tie. Or guy showing up with back of vehicle loaded
with fishing gear, saying that he was going out to catch a few after
work.  And she'd learned to NOT plan on any major meetings for the
Thursday and Friday before hunting or fishing opener.  But she was
okay with that.  As she was impressed like heck at the work ethic of
her new employees.  

There on time, actually before, every morning. Rarely called in sick,
and if they did she believed em because they were not given to the
usual call in sick routine she'd seen in the big city she'd come from.
i.e. The sickness was as often as not really a matter of the person
just didn't feel like working that day, or person had a hangover ...
or was planning to have a hangover.  Not that her new staff were
angels or didn't party.  They weren't, and they did.  But they did not
let partying interfere with their work.

I know of several other examples, on a personal basis.  A friend of
mine works for a large national corporation as a tech rep/ field
engineer/ repairman.  Local state tech rep office used to be in the
Twin Cities. Reps out of there serviced customers in the Twin Cities,
plus all the way to the Canadian border, into eastern Dakotas, down
into northern Iowa.  Corporation paid high rates to lease building in
the Twin Cities, plus paid all the extra taxes which operating out of
the Twin Cities entailed.  And paid prevailing wage rates.  Then they
decided to move that facility.  And were wooed into doing so by a
small town.  Offered some incentives.  Not a lot, but some.  Didn't
need to offer a lot as locally they had a building adequate for the
needs of that corporate service office, with lease rates considerable
less than the office in the Twin Cities.  Local county and town didn't
have all the extra taxes of the Twin Cities.  And so forth.  And the
Corp found that they could easily find qualified help.  Where their
City cousins wanted $25 to $35 an hour plus bennies.  The Small Town
cousins were quite happy to do same work for a bit less than $20 an
hour.  Around $16 to $18 IIRC.  Travel expenses, and work vehicles
paid for by Corp, of course.  Whether in the Twin Cities or not, tech
reps were gonna spend considerable time on the road.  And considerable
time in hotels at some work site.  And so forth. i.e. Friend of mine
is often on the road and away from home 3 to 5 days a week. For
example, may drive 200 to 400 miles to a job, then stay in local hotel
for 2 to 4 days to get job done.  Then drive home.  Since he likes his
wife and his home life, common for him to put in his 40 hrs per week
by Wednesday.  Or more hours.  He's not adverse to working 12 to 18
hours, going to hotel to catch 4 to 6 hours sleep, then go right back
to work. Not bothering with TV watching, night life, etc. Get job
done, then go home.

This all works very well for him, and his peers.  On the local economy
where he lives, the pay rate he gets is good.  He's happy with it.
Yep, it can be long, hard hours. But he's used to that. No complaints.
Especially as he gets to live in the small town he prefers, he hates
big cities, has a couple acres of land, nice house, etc.  And when he
wants, he can have his work week done and be home by late Wednesday
night, early Thursday morning, and have 4 days to rest, tend his lawn
and gardens which are favorite things he likes to do, and go fishing.

Is he feeling bad because he 'stole' a job from a fellow American?

Not even a little bit.  

I know the manager of that service office, who is the same guy who'd
run the Twin Cities office.  He's happy, too.  Says that his new techs
have a higher standard of work ethic, are just as technically
competent as their city counter parts, and don't bitch and moan nearly
as much.  At the same time, since relocating, his branch of the tech
rep groups for that corporation has become the #1 highest productivity
per worker, of such similar groups for the same corp, across the
country.  And not just because the guys get a lower wage.  Guy told me
himself that he attributes more of that to the fact of the higher work
ethic, high quality of work, fewer call backs, and so forth, rather
than the lower average hourly wage.  And says further that the
customers seem happier. Some, national accounts with major
corporations who have facilities located around the country, have gone
so far as to specify that HIS people service accounts, even in cases
where another field office is closer.  Simply because they've come to
trust that his guys do a better job and be more reliable.  Plus ,ost
of em don't have the somewhat shitty attitude one can find among the
big city types.

If yah haven't guessed yet, while I am no expert on these matters, I
do know a little about -some- of the behind the scene causes and
reasons of outsourcing.

In some cases I know of, the jobs to be done can very simply be done
anywhere.  There is no valid reason it must be done by X group of
folks located in an area of high cost of living, and high wage rates.
Many such, if not being outsourced overseas, are being outsourced to
areas within the US. Where workers are paid less in actual dollars.
But given the local economy, live as well or even better than the
people who used to do the work.

i.e. My job can not be outsourced.  It requires a guy to actually be
on a job site. And every single job is different and customized to
THAT site.  But last time I checked, out of curiosity, if I lived in
the California Bay area, I'd have to make 69% more than I'm now paid
to just break even and live as I do now.  Given the differences in
cost of living between the two places.  In short, guy in Frisco who
does exactly what I do, same qualifications, would make more dollars.
But he wouldn't be living any better than I.  And IMHO, not living as
well.  I have lived in the Bay area.  Nice place to visit, but I have
NO desire to ever live there again.  Like where I live now.

But my point is that if THAT Bay Area guy's job can be done from
anywhere, and the company or corporation employing him can find
someone equally qualified to do his job somewhere else, for less
money. What obligation, or need, do they have to NOT liquidate his
position from where it's at, and hire that someone else in another
place?

This is not always a viable or workable thing.  In some cases there
are very good business reasons to keep that fellow in his position, at
that location.  One of the reasons why all jobs are not outsourced.

Also you, and all of us need to think about other questions, when
considering this outsourcing thing, and jobs in general.  Here in
Minnesota, while our unemployment is significantly higher than it was,
it is still only something like 4.5% last time I checked.  And just so
everyone knows as we're in flyover country and most folks on the east
and west coasts know very little about Minnesota and much of what they
think they know is wrong ... we live quite well here.  Standard of
living is high.  And something like 71% of the available, able to
work, population works.  It's about the highest percentage per capita
of the adult population in the workforce in the country.  And we are
part of the U.S.and working with the same problems of a global economy
that most other folks are.  i.e. Competing against foreign countries
and so forth.  Add, that we have even some further disadvantages as
Minnesota has some of the highest local tax rates in the country, some
of the most costly worker's comp and unemployment insurance rates, and
so forth. But we're competing and competitive.  Making money and have
decent lives, level of living, and so forth.

Now, yah got to ask yourself why this is, and what are we perhaps
doing different as compared to some other areas in the US which are
much harder struck by job loss.

No, I don't know the answers.  Can only guess at some.

I hinted at some of them above.  And it's not just those examples.  I
shifted jobs a couple years ago.  But prior to that worked for 10
years for a large, nationwide telecom. (think ... Can You Hear Me
Now?)  Within the corporation is was well recognized that on a worker
for worker basis, their employees in western Wisconsin, Minnesota,
Iowa, Nebraska, North and South Dakota were more productive and
produced a higher profit margin for the corporation than elsewhere.
And they were well known to be, on average, better educated, of higher
technical competence, and more self motivated. (Speaking on average.
There are of course a lot of fine techs elsewhere.)

My point being, that some of the above attitude might well account for
why some areas do better than others in these tough times.

Just some food for thought.

Not slamming anyone here in this newsgroup.  But this is the 21st
century.  And the work enviornment is not what it was in 1950.  Nor
will it ever be, again.  You're not guaranteed a job for life, or that
your job will always be in demand and high paying.  No one can
guarantee that.  No President, no Congress, nobody.

The good news is that there are many US companies succeeding and
competing.  And that companies are not just failing in the US. This
has been a world wide recession and many countries struck just as hard
or worse than we have been.  Some, MUCH worse.

But it is a competitive world.  Some jobs are gone forever, simply
obsolete.  And one must deal with that and learn something different.
Other jobs which were worth $75,000 years ago, are in fact only
$40,000 a year skills now.  Maybe less. Foreign outsourcing or not.
And in other cases the new paradigm of how things are done means that
2 or 3 employees of some lessor, single set of knowledge and skill
levels each, are now being replaced with one guy of multiple
discipline skills and knowledge. 

i.e. In the field in which I work, they used to have one guy to pull
wire, mount devices, and do installs.  Another guy came along who knew
how to terminate the wires, test component, and commission it, then
another guys came along who knew programming, who programmed system.
Then if he had problems, something he did not understand about
electrical systems or HVAC or boiler systems, he called one of our
guys who knew a lot about one of those things, who could answer his
questions.  As the programmer was a programmer, and didn't know a heck
of a lot about the in depth technical details of the equipment he was
writing program for.

Doesn't work that way any more.  Installers still install, but also
must be knowledgeable enough to terminate.  Not just hook this wire to
that terminal as per drawing, understand why and what that input or
outputs does, and how.  And there is only one guy who shows up after
that.  Who can do testing and commissioning and certifying, does the
programming, also does graphics for the front end control unit, and
finally back at the office does the formal, finished Operations and
Maintenance manual for the customer, complete with all instructions,
sequences of operation, hard copy of custom programs, and CAD drawn
'as built' drawings and schematics.  And if it's needed, and our
system we just installed is to be limked into customer's own internal
computer network, and/or Web enabled, same guys is gonna install the
network card(s), makeup and install network cables, hub or router as
needed, assigns addresses, or gets info from customer's IT guy, etc.
And makes up Web page(s) as needed.  Sets security and access levels,
and so forth.

In the past we used to have a staff of folks with various specialties
to do these things.  But it's no longer needed.  Installer is one or
more journeymen electricians, with additional quals as automation and
security and fire systems specialists.  Know not only wire, and
electrical principles, can cite you chapter and verse from  National
Electrical codes, National Fire Codes, building codes, local municipal
and state codes, and so forth.  Are adept at installing 00 gage wire
or coax or Cat 6.  The tech knows the DDC controllers, programming,
and all are certified on HVAC systems, and at least one other, usually
several other disciplines.  Carry multiple licensing.  Electrical,
HVAC, boiler, Gas, fire, security, etc.  At least a couple, or more of
those licenses. And all of them carry at least a few MS certifications
in this and that.

It's the changing nature of the job, and the world.  In the division
of the company for which I work, automation/ energy management/
security.  Overhead office staff is slim ... VERY slim.  And every
single person we have can do more than one job.  It's necessary for us
to stay competitive. And it's necessary to keep our people employed.

We WANT to keep em employed.  It's a sizeable company, but it is a
family business.  And there is a great deal of mutual loyalty.
Between employees and the owners.  But the reality is we can not
afford to just have people sitting around waiting for the next bit of
business.  So new system installers, when not on a new project in
their specialty may be loaned to the repair/service department.  Or a
fire systems guy may be moved over to help an automation guy.  Or a
security systems guy.  We REQUIRE them to be cross trainned. For that
matter, guy may be put to work doing CAD work, if help is needed on
such a project, etc.  Or he might be assigned to filing reports and
paperwork, completing project paperwork, etc.  All are thoroughly
familiar with ALL elements of Microsoft Office, Visio, and AutoCad.

May sound like a pain, and sometimes it is, but it allows us to keep
em working in slack times for that particular man or team.  When
they're between projects in their specialty. <Shrug> We USED TO HAVE
some guys who refused.  Like one guy who said he was a programmer,
period.  And would do nothing else.  Or another guy who sais he wanted
to do ONLY fire systems installs, nothing else.

They work elsewhere, now.

One last thing I'll mention.

I did some checking and found that the system for tracking
unemployment statistics is somewhat faulty, at best.  Not talking
about just the things the many, many Web sites on the net mention.
The Web sites ran by activists who claim some conspiracy to hide
higher unemployment numbers than the federal government admits to.

Some of which I thing are true, and others I think are bogus.

In any event I checked with the State of Minnesota's web site where
they keep such statistics.  It mentions there are probable errors in
the system for counting the unemployed.  Among other things they
mention that some people are dropped off the rolls after awhile.  And
could be considered as having given up  Or considered as still
unemployed. Even tho that may or may not be true.

Problem is that if a worker decided to leave the state and get work
elsewhere, the State has no way of knowing that guy or gal got a job
somewhere else.  Likewise, if person just decided to retire, then he
or she can not be accurately counted as unemployed.  But State office
which tracks these things does not always know this.  Similarly, maybe
former job holder was counted as "unemployed" after a layoff.  Still
on rolls as that. But perhaps it's a person who did not actually have
to work.  Who decided 'Heck with it, for now."  Maybe a housewife.
Tired of hanging about the house who'd been working.  But now that
she's laid off she has stopped seeking job she did not actually need.
And instead satisfied urge to do something by doing volunteer
services.  Or maybe she decided now is a good time to go back to
school.  Get a degree, or learn something different.  If person does
not specifically notify the state agency, they don't truly know what
her status is.  

Also, some are like some people I know. I know several guys laid off
from other jobs, who simply started their own businesses.  They are
counted as having been unemployed and looking.  But not counted as now
working, since they are a business owner.  Even if it's just a one man
business. I work with such a fellow regularly. Laid off from a major
corp doing automation, he's now a one man consulting/design type
business. Has been successful at it. So does not plan to go back on
someone else's payroll.  I know 3 other guys who got laid off but then
formed their own HVAC systems balancing company.  They're each equal
partners and owners.  Also the working staff, secretary, accountant,
and janitors.  Opened up business in an area where professional
balancers are few and far in between.  Are doing well.

Just things to think about.

Bob