Slashdot Mirror
Accenture To Create 15,000 Jobs In US (reuters.com)
Accenture said on Friday it would create 15,000 "highly skilled" new jobs in the United States, as IT services firms brace for a more protectionist U.S. technology visa program under President Donald Trump. From a report on Reuters: The company, which is domiciled in Dublin, Ireland, said the new jobs would increase the company's U.S. workforce by 30 percent to more than 65,000 by the end of 2020. Accenture has more than 394,000 employees, of which about 140,000 are in India. IT services companies have come under the spotlight after Trump said that his administration would focus on creating more jobs for U.S. workers, who had been affected by the outsourcing of jobs abroad. Major IT service companies, particularly those based in India, fly engineers to the United States using H-1B visas to service clients, but some opponents argue they are misusing the visa program to replace U.S. jobs.
The purpose of "consulting" isn't to "consult" but to give C-level executives cover should their big ideas/plans fail and trigger a raft of shareholder lawsuits. Consultants keep the CEO off the witness stand. As with most things in business it's all about covering your own personal rear end.
Because Trump ran and won on it. Anything Trump is for is wrong.
Uh, 5% unemployment at historically-high labor force participation rates? We're not at peak, but we're above the 59% historical labor force maximum participation rate. Even adjusting for a peak participation rate and counting the number of employed against that, unemployment rates wouldn't break 6%.
Consumer goods have had all of 2 months to deal with all of nothing. Consumer goods are still made where they've been made for the past decade and a half.
Wages can't stagnate. It's mathematically-impossible. You know all those tech job layoffs, reorganizations, and other shit that ended with fewer total IT workers in one department or another? Those reduced the number of labor-hours of wages paid to make things. For prices to stay the same, you have to raise wages to compensate for that reduction; yet we have inflation, which means wages are being raised even faster than that. That means wages are actually rising faster than inflation--they have to, or else you don't have inflation.
People like to adjust wages directly to inflation, and somehow get "real wages" that stay flat or decrease while the median-income buying power of those wages increases. Middle- and lower-class people are spending more of their income on luxuries, and are obtaining more and better healthcare than before. Food and clothing are more affordable. Utilities aren't growing in price as fast as wages. Median-income Americans today can buy more than people of 5, 10, and 20 years ago, and yet we say "their wages are going down". Falling wages are the kind of lie people repeat to themselves at night to give them a reason to be angry at not being rich.
We can't see anything about jobs coming back yet. Unemployment was 0.1% higher in January 2017 than December 2016--no surprise, there's always that slump. Where will it be in June? In 2018?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Citation Required. Even if it were true, it defies all economic sense that 4 weeks of protectionist policy changes (most of which haven't even been implemented yet) were the cause of a salary rise. Unless you're talking about CEOs giving themselves a raise in preparation for the plundering that's about to commence.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Well, if we started guarding and enforcing borders like they did in the past...you can keep them out for the most part. I'm talking only about the illegal immigrants.
Legal immigrants are welcome, but the process must be followed and any country should be able to regulate amounts and types of immigration (skill level, etc).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
A. "Hate" is not a word to describe broad socio-economic policies. That's childish and indicative of simplistic thinking that is not sufficient to address this subject.
B. Why protectionism doesn't work would require you to pick up a history book or two.
C. Globalism has largely brought an increase in the standard of living to millions and millions of people. You're talking about "stagnating salaries" only among the working class in the US. Across the world, standards of living generally increase with global trade.
D. "Salaries ticked up for the first time since 90s." What salaries, when and according to who? This sounds like something you just pulled out of your ass.
I don't respond to AC's.
The big consultancies are infamous for bait and switch tactics.
EDS actually had a very few competent people (hard to believe, I know). You would meet them during contract negotiations. Once the deal was inked you would never see anybody who knew anything again.
It's not on the job training that people complain about, it's being promised industry experts and being delivered recent college graduates (C students) or non-english speaking H1Bs. Who proceeded to try and learn their jobs on your dime. Worse, they usually fail at learning, if they succeed, they get transferred to another client that is further up the 'pissed off curve'.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If you care about what's going on beyond your borders, why would you support so-called "free trade"?
Agreements like GATT, NAFTA and the WTO treaty simply give corporations a way to avoid all of the health, safety, labor and environmental protections that apply in the USA while maintaining their access to USA markets.
When you're importing those cheap foreign-made goods, you're exporting pollution and sweat shops. Some "protectionism" (a disparaging globalist term for a sensible policy) to prevent corporations from cutting costs through regulatory arbitrage would be a good thing for America and the world.
Any company that does consulting should be automatically ineligible for H1B as their business model is to provide labor directly on a speculative basis. H1B is meant to fill existing jobs that no one in the country can/will fill, and this does not meet the description of any job in a consulting business model.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
If you're a competent developer, you should avoid companies like this. Bad hours, lots of travel, and substandard pay. Of course, they don't plan on staffing it with competent developers.
- Vincit qui patitur.
So we are ruining our middle and working classes to give foreigners better lives. Why would we ever do this? It doesn't benefit us at all.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
This.
I am a consultant. Most of the times, in the preparation to the audit you already know that all they really want is a CYA paper. They don't want to know about their security situation, they don't want to know how to remedy whatever security issues they may have, what they want is a document they can wave at whoever when the shit hits the fan to show that they had a security audit.
And believe it or not, that is actually already enough. Yes. You needn't be secure. All you have to do for your get-out-of-jail-card is to document your security issues.
Yes. You heard me. Knowing that you have a glaring security hole and not doing anything about it is ok. Not knowing that it's there isn't. Don't ask me why, I don't make the laws, I only abuse them.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Said every government employee/contractor, ever. 99% are lying, mostly to themselves.
I used to believe that until I got my government IT job. Everyone is trying to do their damn best with few resources and almost no respect from the public. Your cynical attitude is why this country is a mess.
Median income growth was -2.3% in the US (that is just a hard fact) over the 8 years since Obama took office.
You mean through a recession caused by the Clintons, which came to force right at the end of Bush's economy-destroying war?
I know personally that 10 years ago I could buy more with my dollar than today
That's called inflation. The question is: could you buy more with the median income of dollars then than you can now? Answer is no.
Fact: The labor participation rates under Obama were the lowest they have been in 40 years (since Jimmy Carter).
Labor participation rates reflect the percent of working-aged Americans who feel they need a job. That is to say: if a two-adult, poor household is struggling to get by and both adults believe they need jobs, you have two people in the labor force; if a two-adult, middle-income household is comfortable and the woman decides to stay home and not seek employment because the household finances are fine and life is comfortable, you have one person in the labor force.
Labor force participation rates don't reflect the ability or lack thereof to get a job. Higher participation rates can reflect cultural behaviors (e.g. social status based in employment) or economic crisis (e.g. people can't survive, so every man, woman, and 16-year-old high schooler works themselves to the bone to try to get by). Lower participation rates reflect economic comfort.
elected Trump to do what every other leader of every other country around the world does and is expected to do: put his own country's interests first..
Cutting off the import of just men's and boys's pants from China means minimum-wage Americans work 3.03 hours instead of 1.87 hours to afford a pair of pants; median-income Americans work 0.92 instead of 0.55 hours to afford a pair of pants; and factory workers producing those Made-in-America pants work for minimum wage. If the factory workers make, say, $21/hr, then the minimum-wage Americans work over 6.13 hours to afford them; middle-incomes work 1.87 hours; and we have ~90,000 fewer American jobs in total versus current economy (a 0.06% increase in unemployment rate).
Is working long hours for lower pay in the interest of our own country?
Is expanding poverty to more households in America in the interest of our own country?
Is destroying good American jobs, either for hazardous low-pay jobs or simply to create a hole in our job market and an increase in unemployment, in the interest of our own country?
If you want to see the direction Trump is steering America, look to North Korea.
Support my political activism on Patreon.