Slashdot Mirror
US Call-Center Jobs — That Pay $100K a Year
bheer writes "BusinessWeek profiles a call center company called iQor which has grown revenues 40% year-on-year by (shock) treating employees as critical assets. It's done this not by nickel-and-diming, but by expanding its US operations (13 centers across the US now), giving employees universal health insurance, and paying salaries and bonuses that are nearly 50% above industry norms. The article notes that outsourcing will continue and globalization will continue to change the world's economic landscape. 'But the US is hardly helpless. With smart processes and the proper incentives, US companies can keep jobs here in America, and do so in a way that is actually better for the company and its employees.' Now if only other companies get a clue as well."
I'd imagine ones that have had to receive tarp or some other government bailout.
luckily for you the rest of the world doesn't want cheap... nowhere in europe you will see products as cheaply made as in America. motherboards and electronics which don't even comply with EU law is being dumped in the US, so there is a big fat market out there for quality products and apple proves it.
Wish I had mod points left. The "47 million" number is bandied about so often by everyone from the President down to NPR radio hosts and everyone's simply accepted it. There are people who are chronically uninsured, but that number is around 8 million, or 2.6% of the population. The problem is magnified both to get more support for reform, and to get support for sweeping changes instead of something narrow in scope actually targeted at those who need it most.
Those of you that are for Obama's health care reforms, take note. (While I'm at it, I'd also like to say that I don't like the current system any more than you do; I simply have different ideas on how it should be changed--namely, for the better.)
Your brain is not a computer.
> Why does it have to be a right?
While mostly unspoken it is the argument behind most of the current debate. And it is important to argue this point out instead of letting the media/Democrats just put this notion in as a settled matter because the right question is a big one.
> Nobody has a right to a free education, but it's in our interest to provide one.
But that is a question of cost/benefit not of a 'right'. And I mostly agree making sure everyone gets an education is a net benefit to society. I disagree that the State should have a monopoly on schools though. Same as the public option => single payer leads to a government monopoly on health care eventually.
> Universal healthcare has the potential to be cheaper than what we've got now
That is the theory we are being sold but if it is cheaper why do we need to find a Trillion or two in extra cash to fund it? And it hasn't worked out as a savings anywhere else without fairly brutal rationing. More basically, I'd ask those making the cost saving argument to point to a single large government program that has ran for a decade and came close to the origional cost estimates or delivered the services promised in a way that didn't turn out as a bad joke on the citizenry. One would do.
And rationing is a given if we accept the left's arguments. Follow me here. The argument is we have millions of people currently not receiving care. I debunked the 47M figure above, but here lets accept their argument. The supply of doctors is what it is, and it takes about a decade to get a new one from high school graduate to M.D. so even if we started today the supply of new doctors will be limited to what is currently in the pipeline for at least a decade. But the number of patients will be jumping dramatically much sooner. See the problem? And if we are going to be making the practice of medicine less attractive by having the government set the payment schedules, and if there is to be cost savings they will be going down, keeping enrollment at current levels will be the challenge and raising the numbers a fantasy.
Democrat delenda est