Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Outsourced Manufacturing Plant Maintenance Creates IT Opportunities (Video)

Posted by Roblimo on from the taking-what-they're-giving-'cause-you're-working-for-a-living dept.

American manufacturing plants are no longer necessarily dank, dirty places where large men without shirts sweat until they drop. Rather, most plants today are full of computer-driven machinery that takes strong skills to install and maintain. And since many manufacturers, especially small ones, can't afford to have high level IT and repair people on staff, their maintenance work is often outsourced. Obviously, this doesn't mean outsourcing to a company in China or India (that's offshoring), but to one right here in the USA. Today's interviewee, Chris LeBeau, is director of information technologies for Advanced Technology Services, which is one of many companies that have sprung up to help factories operate efficiently in a highly computerized world. Most of their techs have wrench-turning skills, but more and more, they also have strong IT skills and walk around carrying tablet computers. So what you have here is a whole set of IT-related careers for people who enjoy working with computers but would rather stay physical and move around than spend all day in front of a monitor at a desk. Chris's comments about why IT-based factory maintenance is more usful here than in China are interesting, too -- and may offer a clue as to why some types of industry are bringing their manufacturing operations back to the U.S. from low-wage countries in order to increase efficiency.

37 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Some manufacturing may be returning to the US but not the jobs or rather fewer, different jobs. A job that took 100 people in China is being replaced in the US by 10 machines and one engineer. Those labor intensive middle class manufacturing jobs are gone and are never coming back.

    1. Re:Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Eventually, almost all jobs will be gone. Then who will the one percenters sell their products to?

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Those labor intensive middle class manufacturing jobs started disappearing when they started using automated spinning and weaving in the late 18th century, although the middle class agricultural work started disappearing in the 17th century with the agricultural revolution.

    3. Re:Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by unixisc · · Score: 1

      True. So the next generation of workers simply has to avoid doing the labor intensive work, and instead learn the things that are in demand, like actually maintaining the equipment that does all that production. If enough people do it, or get the skills to, the US could become more attractive for manufacturing once again.

    4. Re:Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Why do people think that businesses need middle class families to have someone to buy goods?

      Because historically it's true. Your argument that income distribution doesn't matter ignores important realities. Wealthy people consume a lower percentage of their income than others. Great, you say, then they can invest more! Invest in what? Productive investments like factories, improved technology, etc. aren't worthwhile unless you have enough customers. Not only do the rich spend less of their income, but they don't care much about price. They often buy expensive "craft made" goods that don't benefit from more capital investment. So what to invest in? Land? Like other unproductive investments it leads to bubbles if too much money is chasing too few returns.

    5. Re:Manufacturing is back but not the jobs by ranton · · Score: 1

      Why do people think that businesses need middle class families to have someone to buy goods?

      Because historically it's true.

      Historically the middle class is an aberration of the past 100 years, so we have very little information about how the middle class can endure changes in the economy. It is very likely that the middle class is simply a stop-gap to solve the problem of wealthy industrialists needing a large educated workforce. The current trend (although so far a shortly lived trend) is that our economy needs an ever decreasing number of incredibly well educated workers. This is one reason why the upper middle class, something that barely existed until the 70s/80s, is thriving and growing while the middle class is shrinking.

      So historically you can really just pick and choose any data you want to "prove" whatever you want. The rest of your response is a well thought out argument, but saying that we have any historical trends to base theories about the future of the middle class is silly.

      Your argument that income distribution doesn't matter ignores important realities. Wealthy people consume a lower percentage of their income than others. Great, you say, then they can invest more! Invest in what? Productive investments like factories, improved technology, etc. aren't worthwhile unless you have enough customers. Not only do the rich spend less of their income, but they don't care much about price. They often buy expensive "craft made" goods that don't benefit from more capital investment. So what to invest in? Land? Like other unproductive investments it leads to bubbles if too much money is chasing too few returns.

      Most of the large scale investments that improved the world were initially meant for the wealthy (or perhaps the military). Whether it be cars, computers, electricity, indoor plumbing, or anything else I can think of. There are probably many exceptions, but most technologies are first marketed to the wealthy. So it seems that there is plenty of reason to invest even before you start marketing to the middle class. Even if you are just thinking about investments in factories and other forms of mass production, remember that the first crop of super rich industrialists came to power long before the middle class did.

      There are plenty of benefits in selling primarily to well off individuals. Apple sure is making a lot more money than Dell is right now. Like you said, the rich don't care much about price so there are huge profit margins there.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  2. there good outsourcing and bad outsourcing by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    The good being that they do care and at least try to keep the same people on the same sites.

    Bad is overloaded with temps, subs, roaming staff that can change all the time, and more.

  3. jobs restored...? by themushroom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So what you're saying is: American plants gain 5 IT workers because computers/robots are doing the work, but still have not gained back the hundreds of human workers laid off when the plants shipped their labor overseas.

    --
    Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
    1. Re:jobs restored...? by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      There's something wrong about paying a third-world worker a near-slave wage and shipping the result 6000 miles just to save a few pennies that is significantly less wrong when you replace the worker with a robot that's maintained by a reasonably-paid worker here at home. Automation is the future whereas standard of living arbitrage is just an exploitation of current imbalances.

      Excellent but often ignored point. They're not the same, unless you think that nothing ever changes. Unfortunately many economists implicitly think that way (though of course they'd vociferously deny it). Take the old wine and wool example for free trade. Those are agricultural products, hence largely affected by climate and soil. England is not Portugal, and you can't turn it's farms and fields into Portugal's, so free trade makes sense in such situations. Manufacturing goods, information services, etc. are very different. Geography and climate matter little, and capabilities and productivity levels can be changed by a country's efforts. That's a type of change that's largely ignored. Free trade doesn't always make sense under those circumstances.

  4. Ummm what? by avandesande · · Score: 1

    "American manufacturing plants are no longer necessarily dank, dirty places where large men without shirts sweat until they drop."

    Really did anyone believe this?

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:Ummm what? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That was true until about 50 years ago.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Ummm what? by PPH · · Score: 2

      The large, sweaty men are all working in the server room.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Ummm what? by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      The large, sweaty men are all working in the server room.

      Lets just hope they keep their shirts on....

      --
      Monstar L
  5. Labor will never be what it was by schematix · · Score: 2

    American laborers can't compete with labor from China, India, Vietnam, etc. The only way for American manufacturers to keep their doors open at all is to replace unskilled laborers with automated machinery. If they didn't do that then all of the jobs (including the higher end jobs) would be gone. This has greatly reduced the need for unskilled labor and greatly increases demand for people who can design and maintain this type of equipment. Fortunately my job is to program these types of machines, integrate different machine into production lines, and design the underlying infrastructure that supports them. So far it's been a fun unintentional career path.

    --
    Scott
    1. Re:Labor will never be what it was by Skapare · · Score: 1

      They can compete if the US gets hit by a massive depression that makes the dollar virtually worthless. Then $50/hr is enough to buy a half slice of bread each day.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:Labor will never be what it was by geekoid · · Score: 1

      They can compete if the put big tariffs on countries that don't have at least our federal minimum wage and safety.

      Hell, there are slowly loosing the outsourcing edge due to increased energy prices anyways.

      Don't be fooled, even in all the labor was local, they would still replace it with machines.
      They are more reliable and substantial cheaper.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Labor will never be what it was by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Most Americans have this stupid attitude that some kinds of jobs are just somehow below them.

      What does that have to do with this post, which is about jobs manufacturing jobs becoming higher level? If you're looking for an excuse to spout your agenda, at least find a post that's relevant.

    4. Re:Labor will never be what it was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      it can be hard as hell to find anybody to do unskilled hard labor

      for minimum wage and zero benefits

      TFTFY. There's no such thing as a labor shortage. Offer a million dollars an hour and a guaranteed 1,000 hour work year and you'll have hundreds of qualified applicants even in esoteric PhD fields, much less ditch digging. Hell, offer me $10k/week for 12 weeks and cover an AC'ed hotel next door and I'd do it for summer.

      Or did you think people want to do hard physical labor in blistering heat without water when they can get paid the same flipping burgers or greeting people in a nice air-conditioned walmart? Those are crap jobs too, but they're not AS crappy as risking skin cancer and heat stroke for the same crap level of pay.

    5. Re:Labor will never be what it was by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1

      Yeap,
      That's why they manufacture BMW's in South Carolina and BMW has expanded the plant and hired more workers over the years. Last time I took a tour of the facility, they were making all the X3's, X5's, and X6's for the world market, including the ones being sold in Asia.

      Yeap, we can't compete with anyone.

    6. Re:Labor will never be what it was by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Massive depressions don't make dollars worthless, massive depressions make labor worthless.

    7. Re:Labor will never be what it was by Desler · · Score: 1

      However first or second generation Mexicans (especially illegals) are almost always willing to do it.

      That's because they are desperate and often don't realize how much they are being exploited.

  6. unlink healthcare from jobs and then we can by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    unlink healthcare from jobs and then we can compete or at least do better vs others.

  7. Nice Astroturf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am an engineer at a fairly modern furniture plant.

    ATS hires desperate displaced maintenance workers who have acquired years of PLC and high-speed machine skills, and works them like temps at temp wages. Their lack of "ownership", i.e. giving a damn about the plant, unfamiliarity, and constant turnover lead to much higher downtime. No one blames the workers for moving on to greener pastures at the first chance.

    I defy you to find one non-managerial ATS technician who has been with them for more than two years. The revolving door never stops spinning.

    After our 3-year contract with ATS expired, we re-hired an in-house crew again. Lesson learned.

  8. day and night by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    Around 2000, I was in an auto parts plant.

    There was literally a line on the floor ... on one side could have been a scene from the 1950s (or maybe even the 1930s): everything was dirty, crowded, dense with machinery and workers who looked pretty much as Roblimo described.

    On the other side of the line, everything was new, clean, the machines were spaced farther apart, and there were eerily few workers, just a few techs calmly standing at control panels tweaking or monitoring things.

    I never did find out what the deal was ... I was only there to give training on a piece of equipment on the new side. Was weird and a stark contrast, though. Had to be pretty demoralizing in more ways than one for the guys on the "old" side, too.

  9. So what? Dumb people need to die? by erroneus · · Score: 2, Informative

    The idea that "sure, robotics put dozens of people out of work, but robots need technicians to maintain them" is absurd. Not that machines don't need maintenance, but that the number of people displaced approaches the number of people needed to maintain machines. And even if that WERE the case (which is most certainly isn't) then surely we have to face that most people should realize that being a tech isn't something everyone can do effectively. This leaves people who are not technically inclined and not lucky enough to be trained and/or have talent in other areas, to do what? Career criminal? Lifetime welfare recipient? Both?

    Bottom line? The more people out of work, the bigger the tax burden on those remaining who have income or have a job. I don't quite advocate not modernizing or anything like that, so this rant is actually more about outsourcing labor than new labor for in-sourced robotics. But I think there is a lot going on here that is harming good people who just don't have ability. That's kind of sad. Some could call it evolution except that we're doing it in reverse -- the people who don't have jobs and stuff end up having more babies than those with ability and jobs and money.

    So what are we breeding here?

  10. I'm reminded of this story by Krishnoid · · Score: 2

    Manna, by Marshall Brain. The article description is kind of a point-in-time description, but this story gives a good idea of a couple possible futures for increased robot involvement in businesses.

  11. outsourcing vs offshoring by unixisc · · Score: 1

    More seriously I'm glad that the above story draws the difference b/w 'outsourcing' and 'offshoring'. Unfortunately, LinkedIn conflates the 2, but as the above summary points out, they are very different. Outsourcing simply means that work that is not central to the company's line of business, but needs to be done, is handed over to another company, rather than have an in-house department in the company run it. Like having Administaff run all the Admin needs of an organization, since most companies are not in the business of running benefits for their employees. Offshoring is the term that means outsourcing work to China or India.

  12. Re:YOU are labor. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    The money is ALWAYS to be made in sloshing resources from one place to another.

    Offshoring is about sloshing resources from one place to another; technological improvements are not. Technological improvements, meaning in this case improved productivity, can be used indefinitely and built upon for further improvement. Without that virtuous cycle, our standard of living wouldn't even be like the 18th century. By contrast, shipping the factories to China is arbitrage, and you'll lose the "advantage" when foreign labor rates increase or the exchange rate changes.

  13. Re:So what? Dumb people need to die? by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    So what are we breeding here?

    Do you believe in eugenics?

  14. You don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If enough people do it, or get the skills to, the US could become more attractive for manufacturing once again.

    Pursuing skills that are "in demand" is just falling for a shell game. By the time you acquire those skills, the market will be flooded by other people doing the same and you will be stuck with the latest job to become low paying. Increasingly, you will also be stuck with the crushing debt required to obtain said skills, and thus be even further compelled to take whatever crumbs are scattered at your feet.

    BTW, what makes the US unattractive for manufacturing is its relatively high standard of living. Great for selling, lousy for employing. Eventually, its relatively affluent consumer base will become another tragedy of the commons, as every producer just assumes that someone else will pay people enough to by their products. Then it will be game over.

  15. Re:YOU are labor. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    Human whims are faddish.

    Is it a fad that someone buying a box of nails will choose the 100% automation produced variety, instead of paying 100x as much for the hand produced variety we used to have? How about people buying pipe to plumb a house, or do you think that indoor plumbing is a fad? How about electric lights. Are you betting on candles or kerosene lamps replacing them?

  16. What, really? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    > and may offer a clue as to why some types of industry are bringing their manufacturing operations back to the U.S. from low-wage countries in order to increase efficiency.

    From what I've seen, how could it not? Price, efficiency, quality, pick two.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  17. Re:YOU are labor. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    there are people who will shell out for hand forged nails

    P.T. Barnum was right.

    there are those who don't plumb or illuminate their home with whatever is on sale at the local home improvement chain

    Plumbing, they don't use copper or PEX? What do they use, hand formed lead just like the Romans did?

    Are they also avoiding the use of electric light bulbs, or do they use some magical light bulbs for 100x the price? Great business idea: hand blown lightbulbs! So old fashioned, not even Edison did it that way.

    I bet you buy all of your clothes for the lowest possible price

    You lose - pay up.

    millions of other people pay many times the price for functionally equivalent items based on their own perception of what makes clothes valuable

    Most often that perception of value comes from a name that, through clever marketing, has some magic aura about it.

    There are people who pay $300 for jeans exactly because they are made as close as possible to the "hand produced variety we used to have".

    The only time jeans were made from hand woven denim is in some fool's fevered ahistorical imagination. Levi Strauss started making them in 1853, by which time machine spinning and weaving were nearly universal. Even the sewing machine was widely used.

    As for $300, those must be cheapos. Here are some for $2,000: http://www.rawrdenim.com/2011/03/momotaro-jeans-hand-woven-2000-dollars/ Sorry I can't afford them, but if there's a market, it's obvious some people just have too much money.

    Not everyone is a reflexive, lowest-common-denominator consumer.

    So you're assuming that anything which isn't "hand made" is of poor quality. Not only is it often just the opposite (quality often improves through automation), but if it wasn't for all that shoddy stuff we've been making since the beginning of the industrial revolution, most people would live in such a way that they'd envy today's poor.

  18. Re:Just what I was looking for. by pepty · · Score: 1

    Maybe not mangled by machinery, but at Tesla they only pay the people operating that equipment $12-$16 per hour. The techs who repair it won't get much more.

  19. Re:So what? Dumb people need to die? by fa2k · · Score: 1

    This leaves people who are not technically inclined and not lucky enough to be trained and/or have talent in other areas, to do what? Career criminal? Lifetime welfare recipient? Both?

    We seem to find things to do even when all needs are met, some possible examples are
    -Farming gold in WoW, etc
    -Farming IRL for locally grown food using outdated non-industrial methods
    -Organising concerts and other entertainment events
    -Theme parks (could be greatly expanded)

    Even so, the economic system should be adjusted when appropriate, and the extra jobs above are just a transition period. This will happen when it's blindingly obvious that not everyone has to do a full day's work to sustain humanity. There still needs to be a way to motivate the techs, but it's quite possible that they would do it for free.

    The idea that the majority can't contribute anything significant to society, and may just as well do nothing, is a psychological challenge. The economics can be worked out, but we may indeed see a wave of crime just so people have something to do

  20. Ayn Rand and the Libertards by Safety+Cap · · Score: 1

    Remember your Fountainhead:

    Once all the "Takers" are gone, then the "Producers" can frolic in unabashed glory in their new utopia as their products are no longer taken (or consumed) by people who want them.

    And THEN the Morlocks will kill and eat all the Eloi.

    --
    Yeah, right.
  21. Re:Just what I was looking for. by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

    I work at a manufacturing plant doing IT work and make good money. Our operators make $12 to start, I think it goes up to $20 if they are a shift lead. That's pretty good money for somebody with no education, and comes with benefits. I think manufacturing is a good line of work to be in, whether you have an education or not.

    All the manufacturing plants I've worked with have a focus on safety, and their workers are far more likely to be injured or killed commuting than working.

    --
    Man, you really need that seminar!