Slashdot Mirror
Sen. Blumenthal Demands Lifting of IT 'Gag' Order (computerworld.com)
dcblogs writes: U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) is asking the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the layoff and replacement of IT workers by foreign workers at a state energy utility. But he is also demanding that the utility, Eversource Energy, drop a particularly restrictive non-disparagement clause that laid off employees had to sign to receive their severance. This clause bars discussion "that would tend to disparage or discredit" the utility. [emphasis added] He wants the employees, who had to train foreign replacements, to be able to state "honestly what happened to them."
They'll hide it all in a web of contractors, which is exactly what they're doing now. If all else fails they'll fall back on the 'gig' economy and just move the goal post.They'll win, you'll lose. Because you play the game a few yours a day on /. while they do it for a living.
It's like Wargames (if you're old enough to know what that is): The only way to win is not to play. What you really want is tariffs and protectionism, but after 50 years of the right wing (economically speaking) press vilifying them nobody can bring themselves to say it. You will note that China and India both rely heavily on tariffs. They've worked for hundreds of years at their intended purpose of purpose.
Eliminate the H1-B program. For the few real geniuses we want have a lengthy peer review process to prevent the diploma mill graduate loophole. Raise taxes on import goods made with slave labor. Redistribute the wealth in the form of socialized medicine, free education, infrastructure programs and basic income. Lather, rinse repeat. These things work. That's why the 1% is frightened of them; and it's why they want you to be frightened too.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If the salary discrepancy between a US citizen and (let's say) an outsourced Indian employee was less than $4k/year, companies probably wouldn't bother outsourcing in the first place.
Sure they would. In addition to the (illegal) discrepancies in pay that some companies implement, H-1Bs are perceived as more compliant - the employer can always hang the threat of cancelling their visa sponsorship over their heads, so they won't talk back and can't just leave for another U.S. company.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Except for pragmatism. Pragmatism only deals with things that work. That's still a problem, though, because you have to establish a standard of "what works". Pragmatically, the current system works wonderfully for those with money and power, but not nearly as well for the average citizen.
We can observe what happens in the world. I have observed that highly idealistic isms tend to fail, usually because of some fundamental mistakes in determining human nature, as well as ideology needing to become ever more "pure".
Communism does not allow for the inherent wish for humans to advance themselves.
Fundamentalist religion allows for no compromise, and it's need tor enemies and ever increasing purity eventually kills it.
Capitalism, which relies on the greed factor, if unchecked means that once enough capital is obtained, those who have attained it seek to destroy the free market. This should be self evident as the drive that produces the wealth will end up making the most greedy accumulating as much of the wealth as possible, and often by any means.
Socialism comes close, but only because it is the closest to pragmatism. Problem is, there are so many definitions of socialism these days, we have to evaaluate. on a case by case basis.
Libertarianism is another ism that is a little difficult at this point to evaluate, because what passes for modern libertarianism is just a quirky form of Republicanism. I'll note that the downfall of traditional Libertarianism is a miscalculation of human nature, assuming everyone is intelligent and law abiding. Perhaps they would stand a better chance if they didn't have to pander to the social conservative base of the party they choose to identify with. It's been sickening to watch Rand Paul try to pander to the religious right http://crooksandliars.com/2015..., Play George Bush the third by doing the aircraft carrier tough guy biz http://dailycaller.com/2015/03... - the only thing missing was the "Mission Accomplished banner! Then he forgot that there is no compromise, no room for anything that he is told that he has to believe, because if you do not do exactly that, this happens to you. http://teejaw.com/rand-paul-ju....
Actual Libertarianism is not compatible with the Republican party.
And if I'm tough on Paul, he deserves it. Libertarianism comes closest to pragmatism, as long as you remember that you can't run a pure ideology. So in my heretical pick and choose pragmatism, Capitalism with brakes to protect itself from itself, coupled with Libertarianism with it's willingness to respect the individual's rights and obligations (not what currently goes for Libertarianism, and progressive understanding that there are some things that should not be run for profit, and some that should. Banks and producing goods should always be run for profit - health care should not, makes for a pretty good version of pragmatism.
I also have this weird idea that a country becomes wealthy by having as many people have money as possible, not by concentrating it in the hands of a few. And this is not done by taking money from the wealthy at all, but by having as much of the populous enjoy the fruits of their labors by pecuniary renumeration as possible. People with money buy the stuff the job creators make. The present situation of making as many Americans as poor as possible, and having me the taxpayer make up for the shitty wages some industry wants to pay is a race to the bottom.
Pragmatism - its not just for breakfast any more.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
As an outsider looking in, retired but was very much involved for my entire career, I hate to say this but it's starting to look a bit like some of you are just plain fucked. No, I don't just rely on just Slashdot postings to make that observation. However, between things like the trend to train your replacements, H1-B visas being abused, and a belief that everyone should be trained to code by means of mandatory public education, it really doesn't look like the industry has a very healthy future.
I urged my kids to actually do something other than tech-specific but to find something they can be passionate about and hope like hell it wasn't directly tech-related. Thankfully, they listened. This isn't entirely new, it's been going on for a while now. The writing is on the wall and has been for a while. There are still some niche areas but programmers, developers, and IT staff are pretty much commodities now.
At a rough guess of about ten years ago, I had, and shared, some ideas that might have helped prevent some of this but it's far too late for change now. The sad truth is that there's not now a whole lot that most folks can do or will do to try to make this better. The time for action was quite a while ago, it's too late now.
And no, complaining isn't "raising awareness" or helping (not directly related to your comment but salient, nonetheless). I don't expect to be listened to now but, if I can offer just one piece of advice to you and the rest, look for ways to strike it out on your own and start your own business. Admittedly, working for the landed gentry has some potential benefits but I think you'll find there's greater liberty (and responsibility) in ownership.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
The time for unions is long-since past. Even if there were unions, most people are missing the key point. The reasons for unions was "solidarity."
The time for a formal union has passed. The time for solidarity is now. The problem is, few are willing to risk what they have for the sake of what another is losing. (Oddly, they still wonder why nobody comes to their aid when it is their turn to be the loser and some are inclined to think they'll never be the loser.)
Now's the time for solidarity and that's just not going to happen. Are you going to walk off your job to support these guys? Not a chance. Even if you would, someone will happily take the job you vacated and probably do it for less than you. Solidarity is a big, and difficult, thing. You do not see it often. Sadly, even with ubiquitous communication, instances of solidarity seem to be decreasing as opposed to increasing. A union can't fix that.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."