Slashdot Mirror
Former Infosys Recruiter Says He Was Told Not To Hire US Workers
dcblogs writes: A lawsuit by four IT workers alleging that outsourcing firm Infosys favored hiring Indian workers over U.S. workers now includes an account from a former Infosys recruiter about the alleged practice. It includes accounts by Samuel Marrero, who worked in Infosys's talent acquisition unit from 2011 until May 2013, of meetings with executives at the India-based IT services firm. Marrero and other recruiters "frequently complained" to higher-ups at Infosys during these weekly calls that many of the highly qualified American candidates they had presented were being rejected in favor of Indian prospects. In response to one of these complaints, Infosys' global enterprise lead allegedly said, "Americans don't know $#!%," according to the lawsuit. Infosys has denied allegations that it discriminates.
One American salary is still lower than the 35 Indian salaries and data breach penalties that you end up paying if you go the outsourcing route.
We had 3 American's replaced with 45 India Indian outsourced contractors, spent 6 months training (the outsourced people kept rotating out delaying the handover of the support), after the handover, within 6 hours, the accounts were off by over 160,000 dollars, by then end of the first day, they were off by almost 750k.
It took the same 3 American's about 6 days to fix all of the problems caused by the outsourced employees, and cost our company half a million in penalties because of the errors occurring in the first place.
Outsourcing never pays, unless you're in upper management and want to pad your golden parachute so you can leave before it fails due to your mismanagement.
Indians are not a single race (they call it subcontinent for a reason), and as a matter of fact they DO have some pure breed Aryans. Likewise, Americans are not a single race either, so if what its argued is accurate it means ** if the applicant is black, white, purple or for that matter an Indian living in America, he won't get the job and thats it.
So, yes is discrimination but based on geography, not even in race or nationality.
they are discriminated against based on geography.
Wrong. These are US based jobs. They hired South Asian immigrants for jobs in America in preference to people of other races. Infosys has about 15,000 employees in America and 90% of them are South Asian. I doubt that happened by random chance.
Aren't they really discriminated against based on salary?
If so, then that is also illegal. It is illegal for them to pay H1B employees less than they pay American residents with the same capability. So they cannot use the lower cost of H1Bs as a defense.
Since this is for people working in the U.S. and the choice is between H1-B and a citizen, it is actually illegal for them to pay less than the typical American salary expectation.
Exactly. My company, based in the US, had [contractor name redacted] take over our IT. [contractor name redacted] is based in India. They slowly got rid of all the American IT employees over about 2 years and replaced them with Indian nationals. They would rotate them in an out based on whatever kind work visa they had. None of them ever really learned our system and eventually they had to hire back some of the Americans they got rid of.
Fortunately management has started to wake up and we're ditching [contractor name redacted] at the end of their contract.
Well attrition is NBD these days anyhow. Any time your stock price isn't high enough and the CEO wants to sell some shares to buy his next mansion or bonus time is coming and his $retarded bonus is directly related to share prices ... they just lay off a bunch of people to 'fix' the P/L and bump up the share price.
While above is trollish, it's also VERY much true. Layoffs almost invariably raise the stock price of a company so they've become yet another tool in doing business. Spending a career at one company is virtually unheard of in the US. It's a sad state of being.
Let's lay off 10% of our workforce and outsource another 15% (which basically means laying off 25% and giving some outsource company a fraction of what that 15% was paid). Hey look, we reduced our employee compensation costs by 20% ... now look at how much money the company is earning for investors! Go us! Woohoo! Stock market is on the riseeeeee...economy is doing welllllllll....things are all sunshineeeeeeee.....happy dance down the street
Oops...
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
No, actually they are often masters of BS, at least BS good enough for the short-term.
This isn't a matter of having a degree in BSing; it's a matter of racial prejudice and promotion. I've seen it at several other "Indian" firms as well; and typically the positions are written such that only people from their Indian offices qualify so that they can pump them into their US branches under H1Bs. There's a strategy to it; however subtle they may try to make it.
In TFA is true, then the recruiters are trying to call them out on it, and Good for them for doing so.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
No, the definition got screwed up years ago. "Native Americans" really should mean anyone born in America (North, Central, and South America).
I was born in America. I'm a native American. Take all the modern definitions and politically correct garbage and throw it out of the window.