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."

72 of 362 comments (clear)

  1. Um, I'm doubtful by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A phrase I saw in the summary almost had me sending a note to timothy from the "See any serious problems with this story? Email our on-duty editor" link, then when I RTFA I saw that it was word for word from TFA: "IQor also gives its U.S. employees universal health insurance".

    A meaningless phrase, I think. The words "health insurance" suffices; universal health insurance is what Canadian and European residents get from their government. Bad writing at the least, which lead me to suspect that there were bad facts as well. However, most of the rest of it seemed well written.

    Sure, some companies, such as Dell (DELL), have moved call centers back home after customer protests.

    Makes it look like the customers are protesting outsourcing, when in fact what pisses most people off is that the offshore phone monkeys are completely unintelligible. If you're handling calls from Mexican customers, your call center workers should be able to speak fluent Spanish, not bad Spanish like I speak.

    The best of iQor's front-line call-center workers make more than $100,000 per year.

    What's the starting wage? TFA doesn't say.

    And unlike many of its competitors, and an increasing number of other U.S. companies, iQor offers all its employees good health insurance and generous benefits packages.

    Some time in the early 1980s, the head of one of the airlines (that ironically became a union airline later) said "any company that gets a union deserves one". Treat your employees like shit, and they will treat your customers like shit, and may even organize a union.

    IQor also invests in technology designed to make its employees more efficient

    Gad, there's little I hate worse than robocallers. When I say "hello" you better echo my "hello" PDQ or I'm hanging the phone up. You called me; don't put me on hold as soon as I answer without even responding.

    From TFS: But the US is hardly helpless. With smart processes and the proper incentives, U.S. companies can keep jobs here in America, and do so in a way that is actually better for the company and its employees.

    That assumes that today's busiesspeople aren't so greedy and stupid that they're like the monkey who has his hand stuck in the jar, too stupidly greedy to let go of the treat inside. A pretty unwarranted assumption, I think.

    1. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      IQor also invests in technology designed to make its employees more efficient

      Like donuts, and the possibility of more donuts.

    2. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It doesn't matter what the starting wage is, as long as the ladder is there and you can work your way into a decent pay rate.

      More companies should consider this, rather than designing their jobs to have a single pay rate with no possibility of advancement apart from leaving to work elsewhere.

    3. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by cowscows · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure there are some things to nitpick in this particular case, but for all the different ways of crushing souls that corporations have come up with, there are still plenty of companies out there that see value in having happy employees, and with owners just trying to make an honest buck, rather than squeezing every possible dime out of the world.

      I guess the lesson at the end of the day is that there's more than one way to run a business. Imagine that.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    4. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Quothz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The words "health insurance" suffices; universal health insurance is what Canadian and European residents get from their government.

      No, it makes sense. Many companies offer health insurance to salaried professionals, but not to hourly employees. Others have different plans available for workers at different levels. In the context of a business, "universal" excludes those cases.

    5. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by nologin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even though they say that they can give you more perks, the call center jobs still sucks...

      Why?

      Because when a company is proud that it's turnover rate is only 45% (less than half the industry's average), it tells me that this job is something I would never want to touch with a five foot pole (as opposed to a ten foot one).

      A company with 45% turnover on 11000 employees means approximately 4950 employees get churned out in a year. That still isn't very good...

    6. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Interestingly enough, the city I'm from had a "near-shore" call centre. I'm Canadian, and we've got the Western Pacific accent here.

      They were considered an excellent bargain because the staff spoke fluent, unaccented English. The customers loved it.

      It messed up our local economy in a strange way -- West paid $10 / hour to start, which meant that every store in town, from KFC to the Dollar Store, had to pay at least that or they wouldn't get staff. West employed thousands of people, and had a voracious appetite. When you can get $8 frying burgers or $10 + bus passes + tuition bonuses + entry into car draws, we had stores "closed today due to lack of staff".

      When our dollar reached parity last year, it became more expensive to run West than it was to just pay for Americans to do the job. They closed.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    7. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a programmer that works directly with the call centers for a Fortune 500 company: there are a -lot- of other pieces of technology that helps efficiency other than robocallers. Live speech recognition to tell what common customer problems are, smarter call routing (you've called recently before, you must have a problem, let's move you to a higher-level agent), even simple things like better screenpops.

      As to robocallers, though: Our company uses a plain dialer for contacting customers in collections, but it's fully agent-backed - you never hear a machine voice. Robocallers piss off customers.

      But to lump all call center technology into one group of "I hate these things" isn't particularly fair.

    8. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by matastas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not sure how you made the leap from 'technology designed to make its employees more efficient' to robocallers.

      From my understanding of TFA, IQor does customer service type of stuff. So, sophisticated knowledge bases, good front-ends for customer service tools, flexible processes, etc. can all be examples of tech that makes a customer service group more efficient (there's much more). Robocallers wouldn't even apply (the only automated piece of the called is, sometimes, the greeting).

      Did I miss something?

    9. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Golias · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A company with 45% turnover on 11000 employees means approximately 4950 employees get churned out in a year. That still isn't very good...

      A call-center job, no matter how fun and rewarding it might be, is still an entry-level position. When most of your workforce is already planning on being somewhere else in a few years while you are training them in, a 45% turnover rate is OUTSTANDING.

      If you're still holding the exact same position at the exact same company which you took right after graduation, that's not an "entry-level" job, but a "dead-end" job.

      A call center is where you work while you take night classes in network administration, computer programming, or towards your MBA, which will prep you for whatever your REAL career will be. Nobody dreams about growing up to deal with angry customers for a living until retirement, unless you mean "deal with" them in the mafia sense of the word.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    10. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, but from what I've seen, programmers and network admins usually don't make more than $100k except in CA (where the cost of living and ridiculous taxes overwhelm the pay differential).

    11. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by pcolaman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oh geez, West. Talk about a shit-faced company. No direct deposit unless you've worked there five years (like anyone would stay there that long), no assigned desk (rotated seating, even a bathroom break means logging out of your system and then finding a new one when you come back), systems that require running about 6-7 IE Windows and a few other network applications with only 512MB of RAM, 10 minute breaks that are cut short because you have to log back into said slow ass system about 4-5 minutes early in order to get back on the phone after the break, and team leads and senior reps that treat you like it's a damn elementary school. I have no illusion that call center jobs are great jobs, by and large, but I've worked with three different call centers and working at West by far was the worst experience of the three, no contest. The best thing about it was when I called in to tell them I was quitting, they didn't even act a tiny bit surprised. The average employee probably stays there about 2-3 months, including the training that lasts about a month and is much easier than the actual work.

    12. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by cthulu_mt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess that explains why you're so angry all the time.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
    13. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Eil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even though they say that they can give you more perks, the call center jobs still sucks...

      Why?

      Because when a company is proud that it's turnover rate is only 45% (less than half the industry's average), it tells me that this job is something I would never want to touch with a five foot pole (as opposed to a ten foot one).

      Don't judge a an entire industry by the majority of the businesses that comprise it. I work for a managed web hosting company that's doing splendidly even in the recession because we bend over backwards to please our customers. Even when it means that once in awhile we have to refund an entire month's bill to keep the account or dedicate a tech's shift to solving a particularly troublesome MySQL problem. Although there is much that I disagree with in terms of management decisions here, one thing that I stand behind is their commitment to treating every single employee like gold. The pay is not stellar, but we have full medical and dental; a theatre-style lounge complete with projectors, cable TV, Xbox, and PC gaming rigs; unlimited free soft drinks and the company pays for outings like trips to sports games, amusement parks, newly-released movies, paintball, you name it. Every job here is stressful but the perks and camaraderie make it all totally worthwhile and as a result, we have no problem going the extra mile on a daily basis for the customers.

    14. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by fprintf · · Score: 2, Informative

      I didn't see anything in the article that said hourly employees or employees who worked less than a full-time role got health insurance. However I did find in the following application to Fast Company a statement from the founder/CEO that he used the term "health benefits to all agents". http://www.fastcompany.com/fast-50-2008-application/fast-50-2008-application-76

      I must admit, I too was about to discount the article based on the terminology they used. As it turns out, a little searching transformed my instinctive distaste into a little respect.

      --
      This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
    15. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not "universal" healthcare until every one in the universe is covered. Guh! Surely we can pay for that by just forcing the rich to pay their fair share of taxes, right?

      Seriously, I doubt the toilet cleaner has health insurance from IQor, because he's not an iQor employee. iQor might be a great place for all I know, but many companies who proclaim "wonderful benefits for all employees" have a suspiciously low percentage of workers who are actually employees, and the others generally get treated like crap. Google is really extreme about this: I keep expecting the announcement that there are now two sets of bathrooms, one for employees and one for contractors (from the news I've seen, Google contactors can't have any of the free sodas, can't eat in the cafeteria, can't use the ping-pong tables, are beaten if they allow their shadow to touch an employee, etc, etc).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    16. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, because donuts make cops, faster, better, stronger, more intelligent... ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    17. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not fluent English or Spanish or whatever that I need. Many of these off shore call centers speak English fluently enough. It's that they don't understand the words they are speaking nor do they understand the concepts or customers. Irony is lost on them. Detecting frustration in the voice is also lost. You don't need to understand frustration in the voice when you are told "Look I've been on the phone for 56 minutes now and this really is just a simple problem that should have been solved 50 minutes ago!!!". Parsing that sentence into "Fuck I'm pissed off" does not take rocket science! And spare me the apologies - I don't want apologies - At this point I WANT SOLUTIONS!!!

      I spent a couple years on the fones at a call center here in the States, and I can tell you that we had a script we were required to follow, no matter how irate the customer got. Failure to follow the script could lead to immediate termination. Could be, those Filipino call centers are scripted the exact same way, and to go outside the script means they get fired.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    18. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by mrdoogee · · Score: 3, Funny

      You should see them before the donuts....

    19. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by BigDish · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Depends on the call center. I work in what is effectively a call center for a large software company at the escallation site (in the US). Me and my peers love our job, Salaries get into the six-figures after you've been here for 2-3 years (not that they start low, mind you), customers don't scream at us, and we aren't taking calls as fast as we can. I have a friend that works escallations for a large PC company and it's a similar experience for him,

      I completely understand that my experience is not a typical call center, but not all call centers suck.

    20. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by eav · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I want Universal Health Care for everyone; the only horror is that anyone in the US is unable to get health care. Personally I am retired and covered by a better than average health plan. Also I do not see Canada and Europe as having any association between horror and their health plans, rather their health plans are objects of envy and desire by the vast majority of US citizens.

    21. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by BikeHelmet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A meaningless phrase, I think. The words "health insurance" suffices; universal health insurance is what Canadian and European residents get from their government. Bad writing at the least, which lead me to suspect that there were bad facts as well. However, most of the rest of it seemed well written.

      No we don't.

      Sure, if I stab myself with a fork, or need a prescription, going to a doctor or hospital is free. (expensive for the system, but free for me)

      But dentists aren't free... and neither are optometrists. To get arch supports or other foot correction covered requires special (expensive) health insurance, but to get back surgery done doesn't.

      After tripping down the stairs I had to pay for a chiropractic visit out of my own pocket. Our "universal healthcare" is pretty much limited to hospital/MD crap.

    22. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Kristoph · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've co-founded a start-up or 3. My co-founders and I have never offered 'a theatre-style lounge complete with projectors, cable TV, Xbox, and PC gaming rigs; unlimited free soft drinks and the company pays for outings like trips to sports games, amusement parks, newly-released movies, paintball, you name it'. We do always make sure everyone has good hardware and a pleasant working environment. Also, we make sure our team members are well paid.

      IMHO, all else being equal, good pay is a much stronger retention mechanism then toys and free drinks. It's especially critical if you're looking to recruit and retain people with families. Better for productivity too.

      ]{

    23. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by sexconker · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think you mean

      Work it harder, make it better
      Do it faster, makes us stronger

    24. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree. I want to get paid (well) and then go home to the people I *really* want to hang out with. When I see companies with movie theaters and free drinks, all it tells me is that they expect their work to become my life. Thanks, but no thanks.

    25. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by JuzzFunky · · Score: 2, Informative

      It turns out that the old carrot and stick isn't the best motivator for jobs that involve any level of cognitive processing. Check out Dan Pink on the surprising science of motivation at Ted.com.

      --
      Unexpect the expected!
    26. Re:Um, I'm doubtful by Geminii · · Score: 5, Funny

      I just like the juxtaposition of "full dental" with "unlimited free soft drinks". :)

  2. This... by zulater · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is how the small business I work for operates. They treat employees as a vital resource and asset. They know they invest a lot of time and money to hire and train us so they compensate us well according to how well we help the company make money. They know that without the people doing the work the business wouldn't make money. It's how companies used to operate and imho how they should operate.

    Sure in the lean times we don't get the nice bonuses we are used to but we get to keep our jobs because they don't squander away money when times are good because they know bad times are coming.

    Common sense that seems lost in this day and age.

    1. Re:This... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a business owner, I try to do the same thing. It's not difficult, you just can't be greedy. Do well a couple of months? Do go by yourself a brand new $100K car. Shove that cash into reserves, for when you have lean months and don't want to let people go. Good bosses/owners make for great/secure jobs for employees. I don't need an MBA to tell me that.

    2. Re:This... by mansa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yep-

      And that attitude works on a large scale too... one of my company's founders said this about 80 years ago:

      "When all is said and done, this business is nothing but a symbol. And when we translate this, we find that it means a great many people think well of its products, and that a great multitude has faith in the integrity of the men who make this product.

      "In a very short time, the machines that are now so lively will soon become obsolete. And the big buildings, for all their solidity, must some day be replaced.

      "But a business which symbolizes can live so long as there are human beings alive. For it is not built of such flimsy materials as steel and concrete; it is built of human opinions, which may be made to live forever.

      "The goodwill of the people is the only enduring thing in any business. It is the sole substance... the rest is shadow."

      They take care of us, and we do our best to make the company successful.

    3. Re:This... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Another ditto from a small business owner. What's always amazed me is that most companies, rightfully, put the customer first. Employees should come in second, not executive bonuses. After all, it's the employees who get/interact with those "precious" customers, not the executives.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    4. Re:This... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point of capitalism is not to lift up the employees.

      You are looking at this through the evil end of the prism. The point of the article is that you can make money *while* lifting up employees, possibly more than if you crush them beneath your booted heal.

    5. Re:This... by JustOK · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not a simple rank, 'tho. Without employees, customers are useless. Without customers, employees are useless. Without customers and employees, executives are useless. Of the three, executives are most expendable. Or, at least, most of the executives.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    6. Re:This... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Errhm...There's a reason that so many people have poor experiences with work -- it is almost guaranteed that you will make significantly more money by crushing them beneath your booted heel...

      Actually that is not true. Why was Henry Ford successful? Because he paid his employees enough to be able to afford the cars he produced. Robert Heinlein called it enlightened self interest. If I run a business and treat my employees well (and make sure that they know it), they will be more likely to do everything in their power to make my business more successful. On the other hand if I work for a business and it treats me well, if I do everything in my power to make that business successful, I am more likely to have job security.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    7. Re:This... by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The point of capitalism is not to lift up the employees. The point is to take their work and pay them less than the amount of money it generated for the business, do the same for yourself while investing the difference.

      There, fixed that for you.

      There'll be anomalies here and there, but it's never been normal for employees to be paid in proportion to the value they create.

      Nope, never. Not even non-profits do that. Not even communist countries do that. No one, ever, ever, ever does that as a matter of practice and stays in business. You see, there are things other than the employee that must be paid for. Taxes for one. Social Security is mostly paid by your employer. If a company paid you exactly what you produce for the company, the company would be losing money in Soc. Sec. alone. Of course, there is the building you work in, your desk, your phone, your computer, the PC that you use to browse slashdot and so on that your company pays for so that you can do your job.

      It's called overhead and everyone pays it. Even contractors that work for and pay themselves still have to take a chunk out for overhead.

      Also, stop trying to bash capitalism and profit. First of all, profit is not a dirty word. It is the point of business. If a business doesn't make a profit, why bother? It would be just as good to stuff the money in your mattress. It would be better to buy CD's or government bonds.

      And capitalism... you have a problem with capitalism? I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sure you will be happy in your new job making rubber vomit in a factory in China. I'm sure those factory workers are so much more happy than those of us sitting in cushy chairs in our climate controlled buildings surfing the web here in the Capitalist West!

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  3. Wishful Thinking by mpapet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1. Call centers are in the more depressed parts of the U.S. I have a sneaking suspicion the workers are happy-ish to be there, but aren't part of a healthy middle class.
    2...U.S. employees universal health insurance. What kind? PPO. I'm tired of hearing this topline chant when the details of the policies are depressing.
    3....and pays salaries and bonuses that are nearly 50% above industry norms. So, are the call center workers still the working poor?
    4. The best of iQor's front-line call-center workers make more than $100,000 per year The best one serving an uber-tight niche. More spam.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  4. Re:Who pays for it? by funwithBSD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hate to say this, but the company I work for (pick any 3 letters), and any other IT company ends up doing the same thing as this company.

    Either they get competent staff on the front lines, or your back end Sys Engineering staff ends up supporting issues they should have been handled at the front lines.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  5. That's Ironic by fm6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The CEO of this company was born in India!

    I think it says something very nasty about U.S. corporate culture that it takes an immigrant the see value in hiring Americans.

    1. Re:That's Ironic by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Immigrants have always been key innovators in American business. Nothing ironic about that.

    2. Re:That's Ironic by TheLink · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does that mean instead of outsourcing the grunts, they outsourced the CEO?

      --
  6. HIdden Cost by gers0667 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I won't name names, but one of our competitors does this. The down side, they over-inflate their prices to the customers to compensate for 6 digit salaries for sales people. They are lucky to be in a business where they can pull this off because of the complexity of pricing, but as with any market, the margins get thinner and thinner and they just won't last.

  7. Re:Dress up a pig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    What does this have to do with Sarah Palin?

  8. Not helpless, but uninterested and clueless by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quote: "But the US is hardly helpless. With smart processes and the proper incentives, U.S. companies can keep jobs here in America
    .
    Managers rarely care, and even more rarely, have the technical expertise to handle labor decisions in ways that benefit themselves and the country. Their entire focus is getting that next bonus. If they have to move 75% of their operations to lower Slobbovia to do it, they will, rather than spend the 15 minutes of googling and thinking that would allow them to do the job more efficiently and cheaply in the USA.
    .
    Unfortunately, in the USA, most managers have MBAs but nothing else, an education which seems to leave most of them with the ability to do almost anything financial except understand and run a business in real time.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Not helpless, but uninterested and clueless by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Funny

      An MBA is like a pilot's license where they only trained you to fly into the ground. With your grade being based on how quickly you can get to the ground.

  9. Re:Dress up a pig by abigor · · Score: 2, Informative

    They do outsourced customer service, ie support calls, not telemarketing. They also do collections, which I guess is pretty shitty work.

  10. wealth generation by industry by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When you hear about these compensation packages the execs are getting, it makes you wonder how far that could stretch if divided equitably amongst the workers.

    The sad truth is that people don't seem to want to pay more for quality, they'll only pay more for fashion. When Macs were sold based on their utility, they eventually lost out to the up and coming Wintel systems that weren't as good but were a whole lot cheaper. The Mac CEO at the time was advised to cut the price and he said "No, people will pay for quality." No, they didn't. Not enough of them. And Mac didn't really make a comeback until Steve Jobs made them sexy again, made technology dance to the same tune as fashion. Suddenly Apple is chic and cool and people are happy to pay ridiculous gobs of money.

    Go figure.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:wealth generation by industry by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The widening income gap has left a huge hole in consumer items, particularly durable goods. High end goods (ie durables that actually last) are many multiples of the price of cheaper goods. Somehow luxury and utility/durability have merged. If you don't believe me go try and buy a set of knives. Your choices are: a) bendy throwaway toys at walmart/target/whatever or b) half a paycheck at some kitchen boutique.

      My policy now is that if something is supposed to last (and I can afford it or afford to do without it for a while) I make sure to buy well and buy once. It sucks though that I have to do so from brands and places that have outrageous markups though.

  11. Dell's a great example. by tthomas48 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They moved their first call center out of Austin not because their employees were demanding high wages, but because they'd so pissed off everyone even remotely technical in town that they couldn't hire anyone in the first place.
    The great thing about following Dell is at least you know you're going to go into bankruptcy really, really slowly. I guess that's a business plan.

  12. Universal health insurance by FlyingBishop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In addition to these benefits, the company also offers world peace, satellite launches, and ponies.

  13. Keeping jobs in the US is easy... by brian0918 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...just ditch the regulations that drive companies overseas in the first place - minimum wage, and regulations based on political pull (e.g. govt-union partnerships), for starters.

    1. Re:Keeping jobs in the US is easy... by Logical+Zebra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At the very least, minimum wage should be decided at the state or local level. What constitutes a "fair" minimum wage in B-F-Nowhere, Ohio sure as hell isn't a "fair" wage in New York City.

      --
      I have a bad feeling about this...
    2. Re:Keeping jobs in the US is easy... by AndersOSU · · Score: 2, Insightful

      what you're arguing for is the right for moneyed interests to run roughshod over both individual rights (e.g. the right to a safe workplace) and drive down individual opportunities.

      We tried laissez faire in the 1890s - we got slums, tenements, sweatshops, and ultimately the dustbowl and the great depression. Every time we dial back regulation we end up with another S&L fiasco, Enron, or Lehman Brothers.

      I know I'm not about to disabuse you of your supply side fantasy, but the facts are against you.

  14. Re:What a load of crap... by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 3, Funny

    I suspect that in 10 years a computer will be the new support representative. Then I can tell it how bad I hate the company it works for while not feeling bad about it...

    Just don't tell it how you feel about Windows 8 :P

  15. Re:What a load of crap... by rhsanborn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I suspect the fact that these people are incredibly efficient and good at their jobs means that you're less likely to be on the phone for an hour, which appears to be the point. They may get paid 4x more than the average phone jockey, but if they can handle 5x as many calls, then they are a better deal.

  16. CWA 1701 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know at IBM, most mainframe operators (including myself) made over $100k. It wasn't that hard. IBM just worked us to death, and paid us time and a half over 40. When you're working 12-hours a day 7 days a week (84 hours), the dollars add up ($27 RG, $41.50 OT). Add in the fact that I worked the night shift at the time, so I literally couldn't spend the money I was making. I left after a few years.

    I imagine a call-center like this is counting those 6-figure salaries in the same way. They pay their top employees to work 70 / 80 hours a week.

    Google the title. I agree that any company that gets a union deserves one.

  17. Re:Who pays for it? by skine · · Score: 3, Funny

    pick any 3 letters

    Are 'POO' and 'ASS' already taken?

  18. Re:What a load of crap... by jandrese · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The only problem with that theory is that the people calling in will be just as dumb and angry as ever, so even if the guy in the call center is great he probably won't see the massive increase in productivity that you would expect.

    It seems to me that this company is the perfect "second tier" tech support line. The first tier being the guys in India who just go down the list regardless of what problem you have because 75% of the time it's the same dumb problem again and these guys get paid way too much to spend all day telling people what a mouse pointer is or how to double click.

    I've always had the fantasy that if I owned a tech company that had direct contact with customers, that I would have two support lines. The first is right on the front of the support page and sends you to "first tier" support in India. They can escalate your call to second tier, but only after going through all of the easy fixes. The second tier support would have its number listed at the end of the FAQ/support database. People who went through the online support and still had to call would be send directly to the second level techs.

    Of course I tend to have this fantasy every time I call tech support and are forced to go through everything their FAQ already covered that I already tried before they send me off to someone who can actually help.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  19. Only works when customer service actually matters by bzzfzz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There was a brief time when companies considered high-quality customer service to be a competitive edge. This lasted from the beginning of large-scale DP in the 1970s until sometime in the early 1990s when most industries started to see customer service as a cost to be reduced.

    If you've already made a decision to provide crap customer service (an MBA would call it "minimizing service cost to the extent feasible"), it is cheaper to do this from locations with low labor costs. Most companies still prefer to provide crap customer service, and if you call almost any company selling cable, wireless, credit card, satellite, ISP service, banking, or insurance of any kind this is what you're likely to get.

    I presume that iQor is working with clients in high-value segments where high-quality customer service still matters. At this point, such a market is relatively small. There's no doubt it costs more, because you have to be able to retain the good reps, which means you can't put as much pressure on them to meet quotas, and you have to pay them more, and generally put up with things like doctor visits and bathroom breaks that drive down productivity. And you have to hire managers who actually know how to manage and motivate people. Compared to low-wage offshore locations, you end up paying 10x or 20x as much per call (I'm guessing).

    The wireless places and the banks and credit cards aren't, at this point, willing to do this. They model how much churn they're going to get, and what it will cost them, and decide that it isn't worth it. So it's a niche, where if you've sold someone a $20,000 injection molding machine or something, you feel more compelled to have someone on the phone who can actually figure out when it's going to ship.

    I'm not convinced that that changes anything, because niches by their nature do not scale well.

    And I don't think that my cell phone company is going to start having live humans making $30 an hour answer 611 calls on the second ring, either.

  20. Nickel chasing scumbags, IMHO by Obstin8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Our cable company (Rogers) decided to bill us for a non-existent mobile phone account, apparently because the phone subscriber's last name and ours were similar. Spent months talking/fighting/threatening Rogers to get them to cease attributing these bills to us, and we finally succeeded.

    Fast forward 6 months, and all of a sudden we're swamped with 5-6 automated voice messages daily (!) from Iqor. They'd obviously bought the bad paper and were trying to collect. I called them back and explained the situation, and the nice, reasonable, well-paid agent said they would clear it up internally and stop contacting us.

    Fast forward another year, and we've only recently stopped being harrassed by these dirtbags. It was an unending litany of lies from their agents, off-hour calls, up to a dozen automated calls per day, etc., etc. Only when I asked them for all documentation pertaining to the alleged debt, their legal Canadian address where they could be served, and declared my intent to file suit and/or lodge complaints with every authority I could contemplate did they finally manage to stop the calls.

    Rogers and Iqor - a fucking scumbag match made in heaven!

  21. HP Way by Moof123 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even HP/Agilent have lost their way after the founders left. Back in the 50's-80's when the founders still called the shots they valued people (down to the janitors), treated them well, and fostered an environment that was aimed at excellence (i.e. you were inspired to keep up with your coworkers, not constantly dragged down to their level). Once the MBA's got in charge it has been steadily downhill.

    The lure to cut costs vs. the hard to quantify benefits of nurturing employees through creating a rewarding work environement is one few business majors who have not come up through the ranks can appreciate. Sadly it feels like virtually all corporate cultures have succumb to the dark side.

    I used to work 60 hour weeks happily, but having been outright screwed by too many MBA driven nickel and diming fiascos I no longer do. I work my 8 hours and go home, keeping my head down the whole time. I pour my creative juices into home projects instead of unrewarding work ones (3 industrial sewing machine actually come close to the fun of microwave IC design, who'd of thunk?).

  22. "companies" may get a clue - executives won't. by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hope one day people will realize that most executives (in publicly-traded companies) DON'T have the companies', the investors' or the employees' interests at heart. Most of these executives gained their position due to crafty manipulation and NOT by actually, really improving a product or product line, increasing profitability or market share. But they were and will be always great at presenting their (short or very short term) results in the best light possible, and excellent at knowing and manipulating the right people.

    This breed of executives will outsource to poor countries (thus providing a short-term, fleeting increase in margins), lower salaries and/or fire employees at home (thus providing a short-term, fleeting increase in margins) and eliminate R&D and products/services (thus providing a short-term, fleeting increase in margins) - which will look good for a short while. Long enough to get a new promotion or a job at another company, after cashing in.

    Please do yourself a favor and have a glance at this book.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  23. And then what? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This whole offshore call center crap may, as a practical matter, push Congress too far one day. Which is to say, push (us, lower-case note) Americans who vote for cretins too far one day.

    Sooner or later a power-hungry politician will come along and note, loudly and rhetorically, that some businesses are turning into giant wads of foreign money using computers and hirelings to harass Americans by phone call, from outside the country.

    What happens then is anybody's guess. If I could insert an "eating popcorn" emoticon here, I would.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  24. If it doesn't make sense, there's a reason. by istartedi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These $100k phone jobs aren't, "How do I plug in the VCR?" support.

    As somebody else pointed out, It's collections and sales. That's a totally different beast from what most geeks think of as call-center.

    These 6-figure people collect or sell 7-figures. They are not informing you that the router is down, or giving you the IP address for the mail server.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  25. Re:Who pays for it? by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What industry finds call center work so valuable that they can pay iQor enough to pay its employees so well?

    Pretty much all of them. The only difference with iQor is that they are focusing their cashflow in a different way than the traditional model.

    They are paying the people who directly create wealth instead of the risk managers who indirectly create wealth. Given that risk management (capital management, the executives) is becoming a rather boring and formulaic specialty, and that we recently proved that the "best" really aren't that much better at it (the bank collapse was a direct result of poor risk management), it seems reasonable to shift cashflow toward paying the direct creators of wealth and to get by with more state school BABMs and fewer Columbia MBAs.

    Over the past 40 years in particular we shifted to the point of paying risk managers compensatory wages that exceed their wealth creation, while paying labor competitive wages that are vastly below their wealth creation. Perhaps that made sense when capital/risk management was a new, complex, and poorly understood science. What this company seems to be positing, and something with which I agree, is that capital/risk management is becoming formulaic, and so now a portion of the risk management compensation cashflow can be efficiently repurposed toward improving the quality of the product (hiring better communicators in this case).

  26. Re:Dress up a pig by Daxx22 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All things considered, it does. I've done the call-center trenches, making barely more than minimum wage. Yeah, it does suck hard. However, I've always enjoyed helping people (I'm sick in the head I know) and I've moved on to a company that pays well (50k+benefits/bonus, got close to 60k last year) and I'm doing essentially the same job I started out doing (its more technically complex however) I LIKE my job a hell of alot more now that the company supports me as an employee. And I know it affects my job performance, and the support the companies customers receive.

  27. Re:Call-Center Jobs that pay 100 000$ a year by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

    No wonder companies are outsourcing if all USAsians think they have to be overpaid that much

    What do Asians living in the US have to do with it?

  28. Re: This post is also offtopic. by rjstanford · · Score: 2, Informative

    At the risk of losing karma...

    Offtopic is actually correct in this case. If it was a Troll, it would be attempting to incite people to disagree with vitriol. That's clearly not the case. Just as clearly, it has nothing whatsoever to do with call center jobs (at least I hope it doesn't). Thus, offtopic.

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  29. Re:the 'right' to health care by vidarh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree, how can we even have a discussion about some mythical 'right' to healthcare? Hint: It isn't a 'right' if it requires the enslavement of someone else. Doctors and the rest of the healthcare industry are not required to serve you. You do not have a moral claim on their services.

    Practically all British GP's run their own businesses. There's nothing preventing them from operating entirely privately, and many do, but most strong to receive NHS payment to take NHS patients because it's well paid and takes all the billing issues out of the equation. A large chunk of British hospital employees also offer private services. Many of them in NHS hospitals, using spare capacity that they can get access to at a low cost, benefitting both them and the public who get some of their hospital costs offset by private providers that way.

    Certainly none of them are being forced or coerced, and clearly I must be misguided seeing as I don't know of any countries that force people to become doctors and then force them to work for the public. But I guess that doesn't fit with your fantasy world.

    This is the problem with all of the new progressive 'rights' they kee on inventing compared to real human rights. To illustrate, free speech is a fundamental Right possessed by every human being, regardless whether they live in a hellhole that oppresses them.

    All rights are human inventions. To pretend otherwise is meaningless.

    And all rights are meaningless without at least the possibility of having the means and ability to make use of them. First and foremost that means actually staying alive and in good health. Any society that insists on caring about human rights that doesn't also take steps to ensure that everyone has a recent shot at good health is just plain taking the piss.

    This is not a *new* idea - it's an idea that is well over 160 years old, gaining ground starting with the first socialist ideologists, and one that has been penetrating further right in the political landscape ever since (i.e. look at Europe where the vast majority of conservative parties no also staunchly support the concept of a *right* to a level of basic welfare).

    Of course since we don't have universal health care you can usually go to an emergency room and get to see someone before you die, unlike the routine horror stories coming out of the British press.

    You must be reading different stories from the British press than what they actually publish in Britain. As it stands here, anyone can go to an emergency room and be guaranteed treatment here too, but we don't because the vast majority of us get more than good enough treatment by going to our GP and get referred.

    People who are not satisfied are perfectly free to get private health insurance - it's available and *cheap* since they only provide cover above and beyond services where they know they don't stand a chance of competing with the NHS.

  30. Re: This post is also offtopic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow, so you just ignore the commonly accepted definitions of terms and apply them as labels to be viewed by everyone else.
    Enjoy eating your dresser tomorrow morning before you head off to soap, it really is the most important shoe of the day!

  31. Re:the 'right' to health care by aztracker1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would say that personal liberty/freedom extends so far as not to infringe on an other person's rights. Lets assume we have the following rights... The right to live, the right to property, the right to defend one's life and property. All other rights can be considered secondary to these very basic rights. The right to travel is based on the right to live. The right to speak is based in the right to defend oneself and property. Personal freedom should extend so far as not to infringe on the rights of someone else. Law & government can be seen as those conditions where individual wants and needs overlap, and restrict the absolute extension of life and property.

    Basically, I like to break things down into rights, needs, and wants. I should further state that I don't consider "intellectual property" to be property in terms of a "right" I consider it a want. Everything else pretty plainly fills into these categories which work out pretty well.

    I find it ironic when people consider wants as "rights" where they infringe on another person's actual rights. ie: the want of a smoke-free environment outweighing a business owner's right of property (their business establishment). Yes, you can argue that smoking is a danger to one's health, but it isn't an immediate danger, and there is no restriction on a person to leave a smoking establishment. I only use this as an example here because it's probably the best example of this case. I don't like smoking, and wouldn't encourage it, however what someone does in their own property isn't the place of the government to regulate beyond an eminent danger such as poison, rotten food, etc.

    I think people could get along a lot better if there were far less government intervention, and far more common sense over issues that should be relatively simple. And to the detractors against a free market, bear in mind that unionization, protest, and other means of rallying as a collective group are natural parts of a free market, as are loss and failure. Also bear in mind that globalization is not the same as a free market... you cannot trade freely with another party/group/country that does not trade freely.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  32. Re:Why can't I do that outside the US? by jabuzz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Britain is only called England by ignoramuses. While the full details are complex (see ) the basics are that Britain is the combination of at least England, Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    To equate Britain to England demonstrates that your "public" education (because in the U.K. that means something entirely different) was/is considerably lacking in geography.

  33. Re:the 'right' to health care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The fact that people have to pay at all to get any kind of healthcare is just shit. Countries with universal healthcare don't "force" doctors to treat you. Doctors choose to work in whatever hospital they want, or open their own practice or quit and play the stock market or become a plumber... just like any other job.
    All countries I lived in also had free universal healthcare, I went into the hospital several times as a kid with a broken arm or leg, got treated and walked out without even a mention of billing, payment insurance cards or anything like that. My brother stayed in hospital for 15 days and didn't pay anything. My partners mother had breast cancer, and not only was she treated within 1 day of being diagnosed (during a free annual visit), but all the surgery was free and even the reconstructive cosmetic surgery was free (this was in Finland btw).

    In the 21st century, universal healthcare IS a right, especially in the developed world. It's not a matter of being left or right. There's absolutely no reason a government should allow its own people to have substandard access to healthcare.

    It really shits me when I hear people talk about "death panels" and "forcing doctors" to work in hospitals without understanding f all about the concept of modern socialism. Oh no!!! socialism! nooooo we're all going to be enslaved! sent to the gulags! USA.. USA...USA

    The fact is that the government already runs many services - Cops, firemen, the army, FBI, CIA and any number of federal agencies. Would you like to privatise those also? "somebody is robbing my house... come quick" "I'm sorry sir, that item is not covered by your Security Provision Policy... for only 13.50 extra a month we could add it on. It becomes effective after only a 40 day waiting period - subject to eligibility"

    Sure people complain about public health systems in W. Europe, but protesting about stuff makes (good)governments do things about it.

    The plain fact is that the US spends more on healthcare than anyone else and still has lags far far behind other countries.

    All this crap about not supporting the poorest people because that's the capitalist way - bullshit... the only reason they rich can afford healthcare is by keeping the rest of you on minimum wage. Health care affordability isn't exactly skewed to the lower end of the income bell curve is it? If you were sick, would you rather get treated according to how sick you were or according to how much your policy allowed them to treat you?

    I'm all for capitalism and small government, but up to a point. Certain things NEED to be handled by government (law&order, military, health, infrastructure) otherwise it becomes a shitfest with the lowest bidder building stuff to appease the lowest common denominator, interested only in todays profits rather than the betterment of society (and by extension the nation - the whole reason for the government to exist)

    People are talking about freaking internet access being as fundamental as water and electricity - don't you think healthcare should take priority over that?