Slashdot Mirror
Why Outsource When Workers are Willing to Telecommute?
An anonymous reader asks: "Corporations and management resisted telecommuting for years, now jobs flow to distant nations. Did telecommuting become acceptable because of the greater distance? Because some form of on-site management persists? Because labor laws are favorable? Because a well paid middle class is a political threat? Is it really as simple as money? I'll work cheaper if I can choose where I live and work. Must I leave my country to do so?"
I don't know what your experience is, but I've worked at several companies that relied on off-shore resources for some engineering. Sometimes it was collaborating on a project and in some cases entire mini projects were assigned to the off-shore engineers.
In every case, massive re-engineering needed to be done.
It sounds stupid to say this, but these guys just aren't as good as the seasoned tech people we have in the US. They can't see the big picture. They lack the comprehensive technical immersion that we in the US have. This immersion gives us a greater understanding of technology, how it works, how to architect it, etc. Most off-shore engineers were in non-technical jobs before they managed to go to college and learn how to program. They just don't have the background that we do. In 20, 50, 100 years I'm sure this technology gap will fade and perhaps even vanish, but certainly not in the short term.
To the boss, the fact that the fully clothed workers' hourly wage is 1/4 that of the unshaven half-naked ones is another big factor.
I get the feeling that most slashdotters, when they hear "outsourcing to India" picture some run down building with old computers and starving Indians in cheap work clothes who are happy to program for $2 an hour or less, working in sweatshop conditions.
This isn't necessarily the case. India does have almost 1 billion people; not all of them are poor, or uneducated, and not all of them work for nothing.
The fact is, a software house in india may produce work just as good as one in the US, at a fraction of the price, simply because the overall cost of living is so much less.
Educated, intelligent programmers who appreciate their jobs, which are good by their local standards, and these sofwtare firms are competing on a global scale with every other firm out there. And winning.
This isn't the garment industry.
Your salary is only about half of the expense you represent to your employer. You might be willing to work for half salary; would you be willing to work for half salary and pay for all your health care benefits? If you're not a telecommuter, your employer pays for the space you work in; are you willing to work in half a cubical? You need to have some administrative staff support; do you think the people who do those jobs are willing to cut their salaries in half? And work without benefits? (Yes, I know their jobs are at risk, too.)
... well, it might not be a coincidence.
I'm not saying outsourcing is a good idea. I'm saying, if you want to understand it well enough to deal with it, you should understand it well.
P.S.: Even if your employer cuts back, and makes you pay a bigger share, health care costs to employers in the U.S. are outrageously high. If you hear a story about a pharmaceutical company reporting record profits, and then a story about a company outsourcing its software development because programmers in the U.S. are too expensive
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
Oh come on its not at all about money, but control. I've worked at comapanies where they still expect back-room developers to wear a tie even though there is absolutely NO chance that a client will ever see them. That dangly piece of material serves absolutely no functional purpose other than to demonstrate total mindless conformity.
Unfortunately most companies won't ever consider telecommuting because managers don't trust their employees enough. They want to have their staff where they can see how and what they are doing on company time.
The old-fashioned management style won't change until hell freezes over, no matter how much money a company actually loses because of it. Most managers don't actually care about saving the comapny money because its not their money. Also the old-school managers will just refuse to believe it works because they don't want it in the first place.
That's because your salary is only a fraction of your total cost of employment.
There's your payroll taxes (your company pays half your obligation).
There's workman's comp, which is all gray in the area of corporate liability should you electrocute yourself trying to telecommute from your laptop in the bathtub.
There's OSHA regulations and costs (see my point above about laptops and bathtubs).
etc.
Companies don't outsource to individuals in India. They outsource to COMPANIES in India.
Go ahead and form your own 1099 company and bid for some of those outsourcing contacts as your own company.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Telecommuting will not save your job.
;-).
Working longer hours will not save your job.
Working for less money will not save your job.
If you think it will, then you're looking at this problem in the wrong way. You will never be able to beat the cost of offshore labor. Even if you could, you wouldn't want to. There's a reason it's so cheap...everything here costs 10 times more (rent, food, clothing, etc...) than it does in India and China.
It's like trying to beat Tiger Woods at golf. Maybe...maybe...if you train really hard, sacrifice your family and friends, and everything you ever knew or loved, you might be able to beat him in a round of golf if you were having a good day and he was having his worst one ever.
But a much simpler way to be him would just be to school his ass at Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2003' for the PS2. The game is a lot easier if you change the rules a bit
The weakest point of outsourcing is the lack of communication. Developers in India can't communicate with customers here because:
1) English is not their native language
2) There's no face to face communication
3) They're 12 hours ahead
And if you can't talk to the customers, you can't solve new problems. Old problems are easy to solve. Those are the kinds of things that can be effectively outsourced. Building yet another e-business website with a shopping cart and inventory control; Creating one more payroll processing system based on an SQL database; It's the well understood problems, where the customers know exactly what they want, that can be outsourced. Everything else seems to fail.
And that is the IT Industry's saving grace. Using new technology to solve new problems that are not well understood will always have to be done here, because solving those problems requires constant and effective communication with the "customer" (the users of the sofware).
Software is slowly and painfully learning the lesson that manufacturing learned a long time ago: "Build where you sell". If engineers can't talk to the people who will be using thier products, they won't know what to build. Most problems in software are not well understood enough to be completely spec'd out by an intermediary party and passed onto the engineers for implementation. That is why lots of outsourcing ventures fail, and that is why the innovators here in the States will always have a job.
If everyone took jobs for $28k, who is going to pay for universal healthcare?
Life in Orange County
Which part of "I'll work cheaper if I can choose where I live and work." did you not understand?
From the CNN article that got posted here a few days back, "The average computer programmer in India costs $20 per hour in wages and benefits, compared to $65 per hour for an American with a comparable degree and experience, according to consulting firm Cap Gemini Ernst & Young." First of all, as an average American programmer i'm apparently geting gyped by about 70k a year :) Second of all, there are probably quite a number of programmers in America who would be willing to work for $20 an hour if they could telecomute from the backwoods of Maine so as to minimize their living expenses.
Obviously a lot of companies have decided that having an american physically in the office isn't worth a savings of $45 an hour, but once you've decided to hire telecomuters, isn't a $20 an hour American programmer with who management will probably have a lot less communication difficulties a better buy than a $20 an hour programmer from India?
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Here's a quote from the an article previously referenced on SlashDot:
IDC warns that Bangalore, India's primary IT hub, may no longer offer the world's best IT outsourcing value; that the infrastructure there is saturated; and wages for skilled workers are being bid up, with many new grads demanding annual salaries of $4,000 (USD) or more -- not only in Bangalore but all over India.
Oh my God. The nerve of those Indian developers demanding more than $4k/year. No wonder companies are turning to Romania and China. They're obviously less greedy in those countries.
Can you cut your salary demands from $75k to $4k, probably with no health, pension/401k benefits? If you can't, then the argument for telecommuting is moot because someone else will do your job for a hell of a lot less than you will.
I know a lot of Slashdot readers are in favor of globalism, but I don't think they're prepared for the effects of it. Unless you're a plumber or electrician, you better get used to a wildly lower salary and standard of living, because if your job can be sent overseas, it will be, due to this type of astromonical savings.
Not just IT -- engineers, benefits administrators, architects, analysts, animators, call centers, they're even shipping radiologist work overseas because someone in India can read X-rays just as well as someone in NYC.
We won't see the alleged benefits of globalism for decades, so there is probably a long stretch of very rough waters in our future, where entire industries will be eliminated almost overnight by offshoring, and the economic balance of many regions of the US will be ripped to shreds.
The problem is that the change is just too fast to react to. IT is still a relatively new field; when I attended RPI 10-12 years ago there were really no IT courses being taught, it was all CompSci -- data structures, etc. The IT industry as a career has ramped up and burned out in a span of about 10-15 years. That's about 1/5 the length of a person's working years.
How can someone completely retrain themselves every 10 years, when retraining means starting from the ground floor both salarywise and knowledgewise? I'm not talking about evolving, like moving from mainframes to PC's. I'm talking about moving from being a programmer to being a lawyer or an accountant.
How can anyone prepare for a career when there's a significant chance that the career could be totally obliterated in as short a period as 5 years.
Ralph
I don't think programmers in India are getting paid $20 an hour. I think it's more likely that $20 an hour is the total cost of employment including wages, benifits, office space, utilities, communication costs and so on. If you want to telecommute for $20 an hour and pay for your own benifits, utilities, and bandwidth then I'm sure any company would hire you.
The $65 an hour for a programmer in the US and $20 for one elsewhere both include infrastructure, benefits, and management. I doubt that, even though you're working at home, our corporate culture would be willing to cut down on the management part. Unfortunately, this is a good example of the whacked out way our executives figure things. They figure in their salary into the cost of their domestic employees, but not into the cost of overseas employees. This biases things in favor of those overseas.
>
>Going to Nola's or Baha Fresh everyday for lunch? Not anymore dude. thats $300+ a month reduced to $100 by bringing my lunch from home. Now that I ride the train, I dont stop at Fry's twice a week to "just look around" like I used to tell my wife. An easy $150 a month saved just by staying out of the book/CD/game aisles. If I need something now, Ebay has it. Drinks after work with my team? Once a week instead of 3-4 times. Thats another $100 saved.
After-tax, he's saving $200+250+50+200+150+100 = $950/month.
Now dig this. With combined California + Federal taxes on $200K at around 43%, that after-tax savings is equivalent to a pre-tax salary raise of $20000 - about 10%.
> If you can give up some of the ego stuff, you can live just fine in the Valley.
Preach on, brother. You just got yourself a 10% raise, with zero change in your standard of living. (Well, apart from no longer "just looking around" at Fry's, but hey, we all gotta make sacrifices. I'd spend less time "just looking around" at Fry's too, if someone was giving me a $20000 raise for it :-)
Suggested summer read: The Millionaire Next Door: Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy.
I don't want to hear from somebody who makes 200K a year. Boo hoo, don't care.
try cutting back on 60K a year, thats a whole new ball game.
Its unbeleiveable that some who makes 200K a year doesn't understand that, and lies to his wife.
Last month I bought 1 latte, and felt guilty for it.
By ego stuff I assume you mean food, day card insurance and housing, cause buddy, thats all some of us have these days.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
A major problem is that this knee-jerk, xenophobic reaction makes sense to a lot of well-intended people. I would really recommend that you educated yourself in the field of macroeconomics before you hold such a strong sentiment
Markets evolve. Slashdotter's are pretty quick to point out that changing times are eventually going to put the RIAA out of business, yet they scream bloody murder when those same forces are changing an industry that's a bit closer to their personal botttom line. Sorry folks... ya ain't stopping technological evolution. Maintain (and improve) your value by constantly adapting and learning new things; please don't ask the government to get involved.
Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
Now, if the corp is outsourcing everything, and then all those arguments go out the window - there's no reason for that company to be an American company then. It can incorporate in India and pay it's import taxes like everyone else. Fostering this behavior is dereliction of duty by our elected officials - getting involved here is what governments are for.
Now, there is a larger question here of whether its a good idea to prop up a local industry, blah blah blah, but fuck, econonicists(whatever :P) don't really do so hot and predicting things anyway.