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."
Time for unions! and time for enforce the H1-B laws.
Can't the state introduce some regulations
I'm pretty sure that the company (or any company faced with the same) will just cry "Muh interstate commerce!" and try to slide out from under any state regulations. Hence the feds.
Have gnu, will travel.
The company forced them to train their replacements, who are non-citizens brought in to the do the same job cheaper because the utility is run by people who apparently feel it's fine to sell out their own countrymen to make a buck.
I don't know what's so mysterious about this. It is what it is. The only question is what are you going to do about it?
I have a really simple solution. Abolish corporate taxes in their current form and replace them with a head count tax. Every US citizen is, say, $1000/year. Every legal immigrant is $2500. Every foreign national abroad, including contract workers on outsourced work, gets a fee of $5,000. If at any time, more than 25% of your work is either performed by subsidiaries or outsourcing firms based overseas that has a sales or some other nexus into the US, you pay FICA on your global workforce including contracted employees.
So carrot and stick. A big, incredibly sweet looking carrot and a stick that has nails driven into it because we want to make the choice obvious.
I think you are refering to Approximations https://xkcd.com/1047/
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
It's still relevant at a federal level. H1-B visa's are likely the reason the foreign workers could take the domestic jobs. So federal law and/or policy is at the root of the situation.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
Nervous? Not really, just updated my resume'
Finding a new job while you're employed is much easier than finding a new job while unemployed.
Won't happen. Congressional hearings are for witch hunts against "Democrat Party" officials, not violations of labor law.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
> If this is a real story, and your management team actually said that, they're either really, really stupid, or they really think that you can't get a new job on short notice.
I can verify that this happens. Awhile back my manager was replaced by an H1B manager, (true story!) in what might be described as a hostile takeover, and then new manager started replacing locals with H1B contractors, but more open about it -- stated in team meeting that he would concentrate on H1B contractors for all new hires for budgetary reasons -- only pulled from his country of origin, coincidentally. Shortly afterwards, we were all required to document our jobs in minute detail and start providing daily (!) status reports. I started interviewing immediately, but didn't get out in time, got laid off, but since I had started the process ahead of time, was only out of work for a couple weeks. I'd strongly suggest that OP do the same.
Someone else suggested giving incorrect information in the training -- I wouldn't go that far, hm, incomplete might be ok. But my experience, from an outsourcing that I happened to have survived (in a different role), is that, even if you make every good-faith effort to transfer complete knowledge on how to do the job, they'll find a way to screw themselves over. Because to a certain extent, you really do get what you pay for.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
In addition to what others have said, I would start keeping a detailed log. Be sure to note the day you were introduced to Rajiv and who specifically said "teach him everything you know".
It'll come in handy should you choose to file a grievance or sue, down the road.
#DeleteChrome
Where is the investigation into Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice's email servers?
Not to mention that at least 3 people on the Benghazi committee flat out stated the purpose was to sabotage Clinton's campain [DISCLAIMER: I am extremely unlikely to vote for Clinton]
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Look, I like capitalism as much as the next fella...however....
I find it really hard to believe that with all the universities in this country annually graduating hundreds of thousands (millions?) in disciplines ranging from engineering to mathematics, comp sci, physics, etc. that it is necessary to import tech labor. When you consider all the additional inefficiency introduced in the form of language difficulties and what I've often found to be poor training (every problem isn't one that can be solved by consultants by the pound excreting bad java code), I find it hard to believe that it's even worth the effort to game the system in the first place. Yet here we are with legions of billion dollar companies that exist solely to exploit loopholes in the US immigration system while taking advantage of citizen workers and taking fat chunks of income ostensibly paid to the poor saps that are being pimped out to line their pockets.
Frankly, I don't believe that a tech labor shortage exists. What exists is a market distortion that's perpetuated by a corrupt group of companies that line the pockets of politicians in order to siphon their share of guest worker salaries. Just say no.
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/
Negative publicity doesn't really affect a power company. What is anyone going to do, boycott them and live in the dark?
Infosys Limited 4875
Ibm India Private Limited 2757
Wipro Limited 2008
Tata Consultancy Services Limited 1699
Ernst Young Us Llp 1268
Microsoft Corp 1222
Deloitte Consulting Lp 1161
Accenture 1043
Hcl America Inc 865
Ust Global Inc 600
Ibm 553
Larsen Toubro Infotech Limited 517
Igate Technologies Inc 491
Amazon Corporate Llc 447
Cognizant Technology Solutions U S 439
Marlabs Inc 374
Syntel Consulting Inc 367
Qualcomm Technologies 306
Tech Mahindra (Americas),inc. 305
Apple Inc 300
J P Morgan Chase 289
Oracle America Inc 282
Organization? You must be joking..
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.