What Should a Documentary Filmmaker Ask About Offshoring?
Philadelphia-area development economics and finance student Rachel Anderika and her associate, programmer/filmmaker Krishnan, are making a documentary about the effects of offshore outsourcing. Their "still under construction" Web site, Project Outsourced, gives you more information about their work. They're interviewing economists, bankers, anti-outsourcing advocacy groups, pro-outsourcing CEOs, columnists, and others. Where you come in is helping Rachel and Krishnan come up with good questions to ask. We'll forward 10 - 15 of the highest-moderated ones posted here (within the next 24 hours) to them. Expect summaries (and possibly audio or video clips) of the answers in late May, and news about the finished film this Fall.
The one question I have never been able to get a straight answer on. What field should the millions of displaced American IT workers get trained in?
It is always sais that people should be responsbile and learn new skills and train in a new field. When the farm economy shifted to manufacturing, people learned factory work. When manufacturing started to be offshored people were advised to get into IT. What field should people start to train in? Bush talks about training displaced workers, but I haven't heard anything about what their supposed to train in. What is the next new economy, retail?
Very simply, do overseas workers cause more problems than they create? When it comes to programming, coordinating projects between two centers in different facilities in a single country is hard enough. Adding culture and language differences to the mix while not being able to have direct and on-site meetings to architect a complex program, is that a recipe for disaster? With overseas call centers, do you keep enough future customers due to deficiencies in customer support to make it financially viable to continue offshoring support? How do you cooordinate high-level management objectives with an office across the world?
(but who cares)
.. has the standard of living, for those working for American companies, increased at all? Or are the jobs just barely paying the bills like any other job might?
My question is
Is outsourcing seen in the public eye as helping or destroying an economy? I mean, on the one hand, we're loosing jobs locally, but on the other hand it's creating thousands of jobs in 3rd world countries. I heard someone say before every one job here is worth three jobs offshore, for the same amount of money. I guess the question is, are companies benefiting by getting more bang for the buck out of employees helping the economy locally, if not the job market, while at the same time helping the economies of other countries by creating jobs? A penny saved is a penny earned, potentially spent locally.
What effect do you feel the outsourcing of professional jobs has on the economy? When manufacturing moves offshore, it's easy to say we'll all be employed with "knowledge jobs", but what happens when the knowledge jobs move offshore? Doesn't this equate to leaving our own highly skilled individuals unemployed/underemployed while we're pumping money into a foriegn economy via payroll? If we oursource our professional jobs, where will stateside consumers get the money to purchase the (now cheaper?) products? Is a "service only" economic model sustainable for the United States?
To the CEOs of the outsourcing companies:
Is the outsourcing really cheaper when the total costs are figured, or is this move a way to show shareholders that you're doing some cutting in the down economy?
Hot Damn! It's the Soggy Bottom Boys!
Considering this, can the short-term financial gains really offset the long-term benefits a loyal and motivated workforce provide?
A large portion of the cars made at the Honda plants in the USA are made for the US Market. Also, it is/was due to Reagans tarrifs that they located here in the first place.
There is a difference between having a factory in an other country to serve that country and exporting most/all of that factories output to the USA.
Hell, it can't continue much longer due to how our income tax system is setup. If you make less than a certin amount you pay NO income tax, and most of the new 'service' jobs pay less than that amount.
I'm on record for saying that working 100, 80, even 60 hours per week regularly is dysfunctional and counterproductive. There are other management fads that are likewise dysfunctional and counterproductive.
To what extent is outsourcing being driven by staff resistance to management demands? What kinds of demands are being resisted?
This question can be put to both the pro and anti sides.
"Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- B. Franklin
There are a number of perspectives anyone can take on all of this, some purely economic, more purely political and all sorts of odd mixtures.
The one I'm most interested in is this: what obligation does the government have to its citizens? Should it do whatever it can to facilitate profits for businesses? Should it do whatever it can to maintain/attain a high standard of living for all its citizens. Most communities form out of self-interest. They gain more by being together than apart, and often hard compromises are necessary where individuals must give up something for the common good that they've agreed to support. My feeling is that citizens, government and business have all lost any sense of this commonality of interest. So the first question I would ask is: who gains by offshoring and is that gain for the common good or for a specialized good. My feeling is that it's really for a specialized good, large corporations, but I may be wrong. But I do think this is the most important question to ask.
I've heard MBA students spouting something about how all the "work" will be outsourced and people in the US will just "manage" everything. I fail to see how this is a viable model for a country. The foreigners will learn management too, and then those US managers that don't know anything about day to day operations in Singapore will be next to go. How can anyone claim a nation of upper managers is viable with a straight face?
They should comment on the so called "cost of living advantage:"
Q1: If the severe oppression underlying working conditions for the vast majority of Indians was removed, would outsourcing of "high-end" jobs to India cease to be profitable?
Q2: How does the current practice of outsourcing of "high-end" jobs to India help Indians in the ongoing struggle to remove the severe oppression there?
Examples of oppression and their supporting infrastructure:
1) Forced and *uncompensated* displacement of people from rural areas into the cities because of emminent domain siezure by authorities. (Official Indian government figures put the number of people affected by this at around 40Million since 1947. Activists estimate the number is much much higher.)
2) Ubiquitious child labor in the houshold cleaning, and other related service sectors. No real enforcement against it.
3) Child slavery and bonded labor (think "indentured servitude" from your history classes, but much worse.) affecting millions in rural areas. Sporadic enforcement against it.
4) Open physical and verbal brutality of authorities (police, guards, and even employers) towards the poor to keep them obedient and compliant. Personal Note: once on a trip to India, I saw a policeman beat a little beggar kid about 3 hours after my plane touched down. I see examples of stuff like this on every trip to India. I have even heard many well-to-do folks talk openly about how "this is all those kind of people can understand."
5) Right to education for everyone exists on paper only. Many areas have no functioning public school or that school has been "captured" by a subsection of the community with others excluded by overt and implicit discrimination.
6) No democracy within political parties. The voter has no say as to whom will run for a seat on behalf of any given party. (e.g. No caucuses or primaries of any kind.) Rules *preventing* elected members of parliament from voting their conscience on issues affecting their locality.
7) No freedom of information act or sunshine laws. (Even Ashcroft has to obey at least some FOI requests.) Example of a resulting state secret: How much money was spent on the goverment support of parochial (Christian and Muslim) schools as compared to the money spent on public schools open to all?
8) No right to a speedy trial by a jury of peers. Say what you will about the OJ case, etc., participation in jury trials is a powerful way in which the public gets some control over their own destiny by being a part of the justice system. It is a lot harder to corrupt 12 randomly chosen jurors with other jobs than it is to get at one judge who you can count on for repeat business.