Slashdot Mirror


Laid-Off IT Workers Worry US Is Losing Tech Jobs To Outsourcing (www.cio.in)

An anonymous reader shares a CIO article: Sixty-three-year-old Bob Zhang is worried about the future of tech jobs in the U.S. Will the high-paying positions be a thing of the past? Zhang thinks it's already starting to happen. He's one of 79 IT workers from the University of California, San Francisco, who've been laid off. Tuesday was their last day on the job. To replace them, the school is outsourcing some of their work to an Indian firm. "Usually, they outsource the low-paying jobs," he said at a gathering outside a school building. "But now they use H-1B (visa) and use foreign workers to replace the high-paying jobs. This trend is dangerous." It was a sentiment shared among the laid-off IT workers, who've tried to push the school to save their positions, to no avail. Now they fear other publicly-funded universities will take the same approach, and replace U.S. employees with foreign workers. "Once you send out the manufacturing jobs, once you send out the service jobs, once you send out the research jobs, what's left? There's nothing left," said Tan, who's 55 and now looking for a new job. Kurt Ho, another laid-off worker, said he was paid an annual salary of about US$110,000, but the new workers replacing his position will fraction that amount. "In two years, I could be at another company, and I could be facing the same thing," he said.

63 of 391 comments (clear)

  1. Duh... And in other news, the sun is hot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Duh... And in other news, the sun is hot.

    1. Re:Duh... And in other news, the sun is hot. by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not at night, it isn't!

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re: Duh... And in other news, the sun is hot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You will all the thanking trump once he starts the next phase of immigration reform - H visa reduction. It has been his plan all along. Trump has been aware of the destruction foreign workers sponsoring companies cause. The problem is three fold. The government providing visas. The companies will to directly hurt Americans and America by using them, and the desperate foreign workers that will do anything to get out of thier terrible countries. America is the best place even now.

      Once Trump cuts the H visa program to shreds, the other issues resolve itself. Remember Trump has already set the stage for penalizing companies to move operations off shore and rewarding companies to stay on shore.

      I hated Trump during the election. But after sorting out all the false news, I love what he's doing. He is saving our sovereign nation.

      We are America. Not the world. We need to do what is best for our nation and its citizens FIRST, then play world police second. Not the other way around - the way it has been. Someone let this happen. From the 90's. Politicians selling out the American people to enrich themselves.

      God bless Trump. And you all need to wake up. Celebrities are not leaders. They are simple people working for ALot of money. Don't idolize them. And don't think they know best. They don't live like us. Not even close.

  2. Uh...yeah! by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Once you send out the manufacturing jobs, once you send out the service jobs, once you send out the research jobs, what's left? There's nothing left,"

    Well, thank goodness people are beginning to wake up. If you're doing business (i.e.: taking money from people) in a country, especially THIS country, you have a moral obligation to employ people from the community, if possible. Adjust your profit expectations accordingly. We're all in this together, or at least, we should be.
    The H1-B scam has been going on long enough.

    1. Re:Uh...yeah! by geekmux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Once you send out the manufacturing jobs, once you send out the service jobs, once you send out the research jobs, what's left? There's nothing left,"

      Well, thank goodness people are beginning to wake up. If you're doing business (i.e.: taking money from people) in a country, especially THIS country, you have a moral obligation to employ people from the community, if possible. Adjust your profit expectations accordingly. We're all in this together, or at least, we should be. The H1-B scam has been going on long enough.

      Dearest Little People,

      We have lobbied to remove Ethics and Morality from American Business, as they impact our ability to become obscenely wealthy, and will continue to do so.

      Do not assume that care nor concern is capable of crossing the chasm between us, and you.

      In short, Fuck You Very Much.

      Hugs and Kisses,

      - The 1%

    2. Re:Uh...yeah! by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This, so much this.

      Talk about parallel universes ...

      As people scale up in cooperative business ventures, their sheer numbers create another person (see "Citizens United").

      As granularity decreases, so does humanity.

      Groups of people who become businesses morph into the most undesirable people on the planet.

      I mean that literally.

      The sleaze is supported by millions of good people pointing to the despicable collective asshole they have become.

      The golden idol is asymptotic CEO and shareholder wealth unbound by restraint of regulation, accountability, ethics, and morality.

      While the weight of shame and damage is enormous, the dark force is spread across millions and millions of people, each of whom can tolerate their own greed at the molecular level.

      We have met the enemy and he is us.

      ~ Pogo by Walt Kelly

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Uh...yeah! by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A business is not a person. A business has only one moral. What is good for the profit margin. A business will poison the water, and kill its employees as long as their is profit is greater than the cost. See the majority of environmental disaster for the last 300 years. At the center is a business saving money by not safely disposing of products. Even Fukushima was at the heart a business saving money by providing the minimum levels of safety.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    4. Re:Uh...yeah! by avandesande · · Score: 2

      It started in the 80s "Greed is good" that is when employment became a zero-sum game.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    5. Re:Uh...yeah! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      At least they left endowments, hospitals, and theaters as part of their legacy. Most of the new CEOs seem to want to leave nothing behind but a pic of their middle finger.

      I should point out that we get lots of expensive sports stadiums that end up being paid for by local governments.

      At least the Romans got bread and circuses.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:Uh...yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      According to the Supreme Court, a business (corporation) *IS* a person. Fix that for a start and you might make some progress.

    7. Re:Uh...yeah! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pass a law limiting CEO pay and shareholder payouts to some multiple of the number of the salary of every employee below C level. Even better, just limit profits and capital in a similar way, with the excess being taxed off.

      Suddenly employment and good wages become assets rather than liabilities.

      A lot of Japanese companies see their primary reason for existing as to provide employment. I don't think is possible in the West, but perhaps we can change how companies see their human resources in the same way that environmental regulations made efficiency and emissions a factor.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Uh...yeah! by wwphx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've been saying for a few years that the unofficial motto of the Republican Party is "I've got mine, screw you" and this just perpetuates that even though this is driven more by the on-going reality series, Wall Street and the Quest for Quarterly Profits. Though I could save money by getting my prescription meds via mail, I buy them locally because that's local taxes and supporting local jobs. And when our pharmacy plan calls to tell me how much I could save, I tell them that and it usually leaves the person on the other end of the line silent.

      I don't understand how people can think that money is an infinite resource. It has to be backed by something tangible, and when you remove wages from the local economy like this then you weaken the local economy. The middle class is on life support, and that seems to be what the RNC and Wall Street want. There's a story of Henry Ford showing a UAW president a robotic assembly line, bragging about the robots never strike, never ask for a raise, don't take time off sick, can work 24 hours a day. The UAW president replied "But how many cars do these robots buy?"

      Personally I think morality left business when the personnel office became 'Human Resources'. When you devalue a person to a slot that can be filled by any number of interchangeable people, then morality and ethics are out the window.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    9. Re:Uh...yeah! by wyHunter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Grow up. Clinton supported outsourcing in a big way because "These were jobs American didn't want!" And Obama supported the TPP - you know, the trade agreement that would have taken the last of the jobs in the country. New Boss, Same Old Boss.

    10. Re:Uh...yeah! by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      Pass a law limiting CEO pay and shareholder payouts to some multiple of the number of the salary of every employee below C level.

      You really think this should be the role of the government? Let me rephrase, do you think that the US government's constitutional role is to limit anyone's pay?

      Even better, just limit profits and capital in a similar way, with the excess being taxed off.

      Same question as above along with a "really?" You think the government should be able to limit profits and capital? Should the government be able to limit how much of my income I can put in my saving's account and instead require me to invest my savings back into the economy?

      Wasn't one of the criticisms of the banks was not having enough capital to not need the bailouts? That they were spending/lending money instead of just sitting on it in case there was a financial crash.

      Don't you think a company should be able to hold on to whatever capital they deem needed in case they have a bad quarter/year?

    11. Re:Uh...yeah! by sabri · · Score: 3, Funny

      In the UK we

      Dude, the UK is not the US. The UK is a police state where you can get in trouble for something as simple as expressing your opinion on twitter.

      The UK is a socialist state. In the US, we cherish our freedoms, which we gained by kicking you lot out, remember?

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    12. Re:Uh...yeah! by D00MSlayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Considering that CEO-to-regular employee pay is now around 300-to-1, and that CEO pay has increased almost 1000% since the 1970's, and regular employee compensation has only increased 10% in the same time frame, I'd say that there are serious socioeconomic impacts that needs to be addressed.

      Personal opinion:
      It's not ideal to enforce pay restrictions, but there has been a serious class divide over the last 40-50 years, culminating to a point where CEO's are paid absurd compensation packages, even in the event that they tank the company. Employees are now no longer considered valuable assets to a company that is not employee-owned. Something needs to be done to balance company salaries, and to prevent CEO's from running away with the lion's share when the employees are likely more responsible for the company's success than the CEO.

      If proposed laws to restrict CEO pay are not constitutional, we should amend the constitution to allow it. Until we do, they will reap the unwarranted benefits incurred by the labor and sacrifices made by the under-paid employees.

      Again, this is my personal opinion and I could be completely in the wrong, but I feel like SOMETHING needs to be done or else we're all going to be stuck with the shitty end of the stick for a long time to come.

      http://www.epi.org/publication...

    13. Re:Uh...yeah! by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      Let me rephrase, do you think that the US government's constitutional role is to limit anyone's pay?

      The government isn't limiting pay. The government is taxing pay over a particular threshold.

      hould the government be able to limit how much of my income I can put in my saving's account

      Are you unaware of the limits on deposits into IRAs and 401ks?

      Wasn't one of the criticisms of the banks was not having enough capital to not need the bailouts?

      No, the criticism was that they were doing insanely risky deals while pretending they were safe. Thus they overextended themselves and became insolvent.

      The correct course of action would be to temporarily seize the assets of the failed banks, and then sell them off to other banks that were not doing these insane deals....which is what the FDIC does in every other bank failure. The downside to this approach is the investors in the banks lose money - they now own a worthless asset. So the government poured in piles of money so the investors would not suffer the horrific indignity of a loss on their balance sheet.

      Don't you think a company should be able to hold on to whatever capital they deem needed in case they have a bad quarter/year?

      How, exactly, is the company holding on to capital when they spend it on the CEO's pay?

    14. Re:Uh...yeah! by wwphx · · Score: 2

      Though I could save money by getting my prescription meds via mail, I buy them locally because that's local taxes and supporting local jobs. And when our pharmacy plan calls to tell me how much I could save, I tell them that and it usually leaves the person on the other end of the line silent.

      Then don't bitch about the costs of health care when you go out of your way to buy more expensive medicines. This is the reason so many insurance companies are switching away from copays and straight to deductibles.

      Excuse me, but at what point did I "bitch about the costs of health care"? I made a comment that I willingly pay more for meds locally than buying them through the mail, I don't see a complaint in what I said. Having said that, I do spend a lot on health care and pharmacy as I have an immune disorder that is very expensive to treat and keep me alive. I don't like the fact that it seems like my monthly OTC meds get more expensive every time that I pick them up, but I didn't bitch about it. I recognize that my meds will get more expensive over time and that those costs support jobs for the pharmacy insurance company that gives me theoretical price breaks. I'm OK with companies making profit, but not when it's mainly to go for an executive to get a new boat. I don't have to increase their profits by getting my meds mail order at the cost of jobs that are local to my economy.

      I hadn't heard about a switch from copays to straight deductibles, thank you for that information. That could be pretty painful for my wife and I until my annual is met, which, depending on how much the annual cap is, could be 4-5 months. We'd probably have to front-load a slush fund to have a pre-allocated cash surplus for the start of a new plan year.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    15. Re:Uh...yeah! by nibsniven4361 · · Score: 3, Informative

      - The 0.001%

      FTFY.

      Top 1% = $368,238 (20.9% of income) Top 0.5% = $558,726 (16.8% of income) Top 0.1% = $1,695,136 (10.3% of income) Top 0.01% = $9,141,190 (5% of income)

  3. rock star by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

    I see that there are still jobs, but companies expect you to be more of a rock star to keep them.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:rock star by TrancePhreak · · Score: 2

      They also ask that you give up your life for them, with no guarantees of future employment

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    2. Re:rock star by D00MSlayer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My girlfriend was told this by her last employer. They expected her to do the work of someone making 40-50k/yr in her position, for 30k/yr instead, and told her that the job should be her life(little to no time off, mandatory OT if necessary). She told them that she expected a raise at her 1yr review, and instead they fired her.
      The funny thing though is that she was the best employee that they had, and after they fired her a number of people immediately started looking for jobs elsewhere and quit. It's a fairly small company, so they've been impacted greatly now.

  4. It will ultimately balance out by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In the short term, people in the US can choose to work at what amounts to starvation wages compared to local cost of living. Or move on to those new jobs everyone's always claiming will magically appear.

    In the long term (after the American economy is destroyed but the richest have milked it for all they can and moved to whatever nation can still support their standard of living), foreign workers will have cause their local economies to grow and their wage expectations will grow simultaneously. Ultimately, they'll be the same as domestic labour only with the hassle of dealing with people in a different time zone and possibly with cultural and language issues. But hey, equalization will happen faster if America's crashing as quickly as they're growing.

    It would seem one solution is to levy a 'standard of living' tariff on offshored jobs that covers the difference in expense, and here's the difficult part - remit the collected tariffs to the foreign workers instead of trying to hold onto it domestically.

    That will not only make the domestic labor force more competitive in the short term, it will insure a rapid rise of the foreign economy so they are less competitive in the long run.

    Or you can put up various walls, isolate your nation from the global economy, and find yourself falling further and further behind the rest of the planet over time.

  5. UCSF is training people for...what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Isn't UCSF putting themselves out of a job? If the jobs get outsourced, then who needs UCSF? There's no reason to go to UC and get trained for something if no one will hire you.

    1. Re:UCSF is training people for...what? by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      UCSF will educate foreign students. Colleges in the UC system and most other state-sponsored colleges nationwide actually prefer foreign students. Locals pay less through in-state tuition discounts while foreign students pay considerably more.

    2. Re:UCSF is training people for...what? by Notabadguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not any different from the argument that companies shouldn't outsource manufacturing because it's eroding their customer base. It's meaningless in the era short term sales goals, meeting quarterly projections, and golden parachutes.

      Yes, it is different. Those manufacturing companies aren't milking the government teat for funding. Whether companies outsource or not is a different beast - but a public institution using taxpayer money and outsourcing - giving that taxpayer money to non-nationals in what amounts to foreign aid, should be a big no-no.

  6. I have the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Label people who disagree "white supremicists" or "nativists" or "Nazis". Then disregard everything they say. Problem solved.

  7. Reversion to the mean by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once you send out the manufacturing jobs, once you send out the service jobs, once you send out the research jobs, what's left?

    A reversion to the mean. The US has some of the highest wages in the world. That's great but if we want to keep it that way we need to be doing things that are hard to replicate outside the US. That means investing in research and education and technology and infrastructure and supply chains. All things that have payoffs which are measured in decades. There is nothing special about the US that entitles workers here to abnormally high wages when the work can be done adequately well in locations with lower labor costs. If we want higher than average wages then we need to do things that will get higher than average results.

    That's why a lot of the rhetoric coming from Washington about "bringing back manufacturing jobs" is just nonsense. Unless you want to accompany it with a reduction in wages to significantly lower amounts than we currently expect. Those jobs left because they were labor intensive and labor costs were substantially lower elsewhere. If the job can be done in China for $2/hour, you aren't going to compete on labor intensive manufacturing with wages of $15/hour or more. No amount of political promises will change that fact. Those jobs aren't coming back unless a drastic drop in wages comes with them. I'm pretty sure we don't actually want that.

    1. Re:Reversion to the mean by flink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If those manufacturing companies destroy all the wealth of the middle class by outsourcing all the jobs, they'll have nobody left to sell their shit too. This is why globalization is a loser's game. The "invisible hand" and free market only work if both labor and capital are mobile. But in the global economy, capital is infinitely mobile, while people are still mostly restricted to finding work in their own countries. This allows globalized corporations to play countries off each other in a game of international labor arbitrage to the detriment of every single human being on the planet.

    2. Re:Reversion to the mean by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Informative

      If we want higher than average wages then we need to do things that will get higher than average results.

      I think this is spot on, and I suggest we fix the education system.

      We don't have schools.

      We have day care centers.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Reversion to the mean by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      people are leaving india (etc) to come to the US and they get a MUCH BETTER STANDARD OF LIVING. its a win for them.

      reverse it: you are suggesting we americans leave one of the best countries in the world (for living standard) because some rich assholes CHOOSE to not hire us and watch us starve if we stay locally?

      I think your thinking (and human compassion) needs work, my friend. you have an odd way of seeing things.

      expecting locals to uproot because some rich fucker says so? yeah, that's surely the american dream, right there.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:Reversion to the mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If we want higher than average wages then we need to do things that will get higher than average results.

      I work at UCSF (so posting AC). The truth is these IT workers were simply never very good (at least on average). The network is slow and unstable. Requests take forever to be filled. IT places unreasonable costs on anyone foolish enough to work with, instead of around, them. They charge over $1,000 just to make a single DNS entry for a new computer, for example. Then there's the bloatware they stick on university laptops and PCs - Symantec, BigFix (institutional spyware), Dell Data Protection. DDP in particular is totally incompatible with recent Mac OSes, leaving most Mac laptops with frequent "reboot to update" prompts that never go away (not fixed in two years).

      They also failed to garner allies at UCSF who would have fought for their jobs. This is an institution of scientists who depend on IT services in most aspects of their work, and one in which professional camaraderie is very important. Unlike some other schools / research centers, IT here never participated in the culture. If they had made themselves personally available to people, if they had shown that they cared about the scientific output of the university, if they had demonstrated some dedication to making things work for people, so their science could get done, and if they had built some social capital through friendly outreach, then they wouldn't be getting outsourced.

      UCSF is a premier research university - the second largest recipient of NIH funding in the country - and most aspects of the university reflect that. I'm sure some companies would outsource workers to save a couple short-term bucks regardless of how indispensable those workers had become. This university isn't like that, but we will look for a cheaper option if there's nothing to recommend sticking with what we've got.

    5. Re:Reversion to the mean by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 2

      I work at a university as well (not a community college - one that does research grants and has doctorate programs) - not that you'll read this, but I find a lot of this cross billing madness that happens at the management level.

      For instance all those things you mentioned we do for free - the only thing we change for is when you actually need physical servers, licensing, and storage space.

      We probably finish over a hundred projects a year - as central IT - it's well over a quarter of all projects the university works in total (both academic and administrative).

      Anyhow outsourcing all your IT management isn't going to change this.

    6. Re:Reversion to the mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Who are these "they" you are referring to? These all sound like management decisions.

      Same AC. I concede that the crummy bloatware and insane pricing is management's fault, but the apparent buffer bloat, weird packet filtering, and generally bad network performance everywhere on campus? It feels like careless gear selection, installation, and maintenance to me. Then there's the cultural aspect - the university holds dear a collaborative atmosphere in which one simply goes down the hall to meet people face-to-face. I don't think anyone I know here has ever met an IT worker or low-level manager in person.

      And then there's the issue of legacy code that just grows more fragile over time. Again, that's management's responsibility: "add feature, feature, feature; the sooner the better and we can't afford quality."

      This is really just an institutional IT department at a public university. Almost all of the actual software development that takes place here is within the context of an academic lab, and engineers are paid out of grant funding by their PIs. The same goes for our academic cluster staff. To the extent they isn't crippled by the bad building network, those systems are very impressive.

      Outsourcing isn't going to fix any of it.

      I don't think anyone (aside from the administration perhaps) is under the illusion outsourcing is going to fix the problems, but at least we'll be paying shit to match the shit performance.

    7. Re:Reversion to the mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The sad thing is these workers were likely bullied into compliance with the management objectives on the threat of losing their jobs, and they were sold out anyway.

      Parent AC here. That may well be true, but if so, I wish that IT workers themselves had gone to the effort to make that clear to others at the university. There is a very open environment here, and what I've been saying distills the general opinions of lots of folks from graduate students to department-administering PIs.

  8. Global competition by xession · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And herein lies the inherent problem to the globalized capitalist economy. Eventually, there could be an equalized economy shared across the globe.

    Getting to that point however, requires that the economically healthy nations fall while the economically poor nations rise.

    The business owner benefits. The bankers benefit. The shareholders benefit. The workers get the shaft. Historically, trends like that lead to bad things.

    1. Re:Global competition by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      binary thinking, much?

      I don't want to buy a sports car. I just want to have a stable job that lasts long enough for me at at least CONSIDER buying a home. not owning a home means that every few years, I have to move when the landlord decides to sell his rental home or eject me since he can make more money with a new tenant than one that has been there for a few years. add to this the fact that you cannot rent a place unless you HAVE A JOB AT THE TIME (at least in the bay area, its an unwritten rule and I've been caught in that situation more than once; its not fun, let me tell you.)

      its not about luxuries. its about having a stable life, being able to continue to afford healthcare, to be able to continue to afford the RENT payments and all that. forget even saving for the future, I'm just about able to make immediate bill payments and hope I break even each month.

      why should I care about some other country's poor folks? we have enough problems in this country; I don't see india (etc) reaching out to help the US! no other country is reaching out to help us, either. so why is it OUR JOB to employ the world's poorer people in their own countries AT OUR OWN EXPENSE?

      I know where you're from. I can tell by how you write.

      and you have a very unbalanced view of things.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  9. This is illegal. by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is only valid to hire an H1B when a qualified citizen does not exist. If you're laying off citizens to replace them with H1Bs, the use of H1Bs was clearly not valid.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:This is illegal. by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Incorrect. The rules you're talking about are easily and routinely gamed. The workarounds are straightforward.

    2. Re:This is illegal. by computational+super · · Score: 2

      You think they care. That's cute.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    3. Re:This is illegal. by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hah. Nope. You miss all those stories in the news and even here on /. over the last couple of years of people being forced to train their replacements and being replaced by H1B's? Guess so, there's no shortage of stories on it. These companies are gaming the system. Just like companies in Canada are abusing the TFW(temporary foreign worker) program. The difference between H1B and TFW if anyone is wondering is that a TFW can work any job. The shittiest companies at the very bottom(janitorial/fast food), to big name companies like Royal Bank of Canada have been caught gaming the system up here too.

      This type of stuff is what causes violent revolutions, and neither governments or businesses seem to give a shit that they're contributing to something that will bite them in the ass. Only upside is down there in the US, Trump wants to gut and fix that program. In Canada, Trudeau decided to undo what the conservatives had put in place in order to limit how companies could abuse the TFW program.

      Nothing but a race to the fucking bottom, and it's very easy to see where this shit started. Those people who used to seasonally work as farm workers(fruit/tobacco/etc). When I was a teen, you could make 30-50% more per hour then min wage. Then the government changed the rule to allow imported foreign labor. Hourly wages went away, people were paid by weight/count. And people who lived in the country stopped doing the work because it was an absolute shit wage being paid.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:This is illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They have some way around it that works. Major IT outsourcing firm here. We lay off 50-100 Americans every 1-2 months. Slowly. Quietly. That way the newspaper doesn't pick up on it and report about it. Then we replace those people with H1B visa workers. And that's only on if we can't outright send the work directly to India, i.e. a customer contract requiring US-based resources. Hell we even have a non-public HR policy titled "India First" which states this as corporate policy. Also we have a fuck load of lobbyists buying nice dinners and golf outings for your congress-critters in order to advance this agenda.

      I hate it. I think it's wrong. But they have some way they are pulling it off, legally.

    5. Re:This is illegal. by Khyber · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "You been paying attention to what he's done and said?"

      Yes, for the past 20+ years. Apparently you have not paid any attention to him until recently, which makes you a complete moron for trusting him.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    6. Re:This is illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You been paying attention to what he's done and said?

      Yes, it has been staggering in his lack of competence, and general inability to remain accurate to facts, combined with self-aggrandizement and deceit.

      Do you think I didn't notice? Well, I think you haven't noticed. I bet you can't even name 10 of Trump's personal screw-ups. I'll even let you pick them out over his life time, even though you could likely do it in the last week if you paid attention.

      Let me know when you get to the part where he's been keeping his promises, and putting people in place who would happily stand up to his views if they're bad.

      Neither one of those things has happened. Ok, I heard maybe DeVos tried to push back on the transgender ruling, but that didn't lead to anything different. It's still gone. Because you know, that bathroom business is SO dreadful. But let's see, we have his military operation (a failure), his precious executive order (also a failure, a failure so bad he put it off again this week), and alternative facts out the wazoo.

      Evidence indicates he doesn't listen to advice, and his parrots are trained to tell him whatever he wants to hear. And his promises are not kept.

      Your thinking is still stuck in a period where politicians would lie through their teeth, and you're now in an era where you have a person who wasn't ever a politician until he was elected POTUS keeping his promises.

      Your thinking seems to be stuck in the idea that Donald Trump doesn't have a history of lying through his teeth and out his ass, whose idea of keeping a promise is pretending he did something, when he did no such thing. His history as a businessman is one of scams and deceits, of self-promotion and failure, and has been known since the 1980s. After the election? See Boeing. (Railing at nothing, as the project to replace the VC-25's was in the planning stages) See Lockheed(nothing he did to accomplish any savings), see the deficit(he had boasting about a 200 billion dollar blip when he hasn't even passed a budget), see his executive order(a failure on its own, which he promised to fight in court, but he's not going to do that because that's a waste of time, and even now he put it off, because it'd just make him look bad), see his nominees to join the Swamp(A number of troubled individuals, from a racist to an unqualified bear-fearer).

      And now the funny part. Where you can hear the former never-trump, anti-trump people who've flipped pro-trump because they've seen him keep his promises and do more in a month then the Obama administration did in 4 years. To paraphrase.

      Nope. You should hear the real truth: People aren't flipping to Trump. He can claim to be beloved, and appreciated, but it turns out, he's still the guy who didn't win the popular vote. The things he's done include a flopped executive order, whining about his daughter's product line being dropped, nominating numerous incompetent or corrupt people into office(one who has already resigned, another who was just revealed to have lied in his nomination process), blathering out a litany of lies, oh wait, wait, he called them Alternative Facts, railing at the media(He really hates criticism, in case you haven't noticed), and otherwise totally striking out. No ACA repeal on the table. Instead, he just realized it would be complicated. Frankly, that's the most shocking thing I've heard out of him, it's basically demonstrating to me how badly he presented himself on the subject. Oh but wait, Ryan is doing something. Right? Oh wait, he's keeping that under wraps. Oh my.

      I suppose you could count the Supreme Court nominee, bu

    7. Re:This is illegal. by OhPlz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He's more trustworthy than Hillary.

    8. Re:This is illegal. by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do what in a month? Take credit for stuff that the Obama administration worked on for 8 years?

      You mean Obama's actions to worsen race relations in the US? Every single time he opened his mouth on something relating to race, he made the situation worse? That instead of waiting for truth, his administration would fabricate and outright lie? You remember Benghazi don't you? How's that "it was because it was a video narrative" bullshit working out these days. To fund terrorists in the middle east because Assad? To back groups that are linked to ISIS? You wonder why ISIS is already on the run a month into Trumps presidency when the mad dog was let off the leash.

      The only thing he's really done is to stun the rest of the world into immobility for a while until they figure out whether he is the homicidal maniac that he tries to pretend he is . As soon as somebody else decides to stomp on his balls and gets away with it, it's game over for the game guy.

      Yeah because picking Hillary was a great idea. The same person with so many conflicts of interest that she was beholden to dozens of governments? Gee you catch why part of the clinton foundation suddenly shutdown. Her desire to push the US into a war with Russia is a great idea too. Especially since she wanted to bomb them in Syria. How about her wanting to drone strike Assanage. Yeah, there's that homicidal maniac you're looking for. You wonder why marines had to be assigned under the Obama administration, but over 13k of them volunteered to be on the detail for Trump. Dig your head out of your ass.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  10. I don't mind losing the job. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I mind is the mentality that "if you're unemployed, then you're no good."

    It kills me when I apply to jobs that I fit very closely or even exactly only to hear nothing back or "you don't have the skills."

    And what really hurts is when your friends and family wonder why you can't get a job because you're a programmer and there's a shortage of programmers.

    THAT hurts along with the comments. They think if you "know computers" you can just walk into any job you want and if you can't, then there's something wrong with you.

    I love programming and computers - I HATE this goddamn industry!

  11. Hopefully, Trump will stop this by p51d007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is an ABUSE of the H1B visa program, clear and simple. It's been done under democratic "leadership" and republican "leadership" Why? Simple...$$$$ corporations want to earn more profit, so they outsource for pennies on a dollar, kick back a ton of so called campaign donations, to ensure that the government goes along with it.

    1. Re:Hopefully, Trump will stop this by antdude · · Score: 2

      He will have to prove it.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  12. Re:Obvious solution by Kohath · · Score: 4, Informative

    At the same price point, there is no reason for an employer to prefer the H-1B.

    H1Bs can't quit without jeopardizing their residency.

  13. I'm worried about the "newbie pipeline" by ErichTheRed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm 41, so I guess I'm way past due for Logan's Run style "renewal". However, I'm still here working in IT hoping I can stick around as long as possible because I actually enjoy the work a lot. I really don't like the fact that age discrimination makes it very hard for laid-off older IT workers to come back into the profession (and yes, it does exist....I understand some people don't keep their skills sharp, but even good people over 50 can't get cold call interviews; they need to know someone.) In my opinion, outsourcing and the H-1B visa simultaneously implement a brake on salaries for experienced people, and take away entry level positions that are needed to replace people at the low end. When a company can call up one of the body shops and cut their IT costs (on paper) by 80%, it's very difficult to convince them that they'll end up paying way more in the end.

    This is a subject I care about a lot, because one of the things I like best about my job is sharing knowledge with the newbies and making them better IT people. It's fun being the adult in the room and showing people who've grown up with systems that are very abstracted from the actual goings-on under the hood how something actually works behind that cloud service, API call or PowerShell cmdlet. IT pros with a good grasp on fundamentals have no trouble picking up the latest fad or hot tool in my experience. What I worry about is the fact that people coming into the profession will see offshoring, outsourcing and age discrimination as a reason to not go into IT or software development. People aren't dumb - if they're smart enough to be excellent students, they'll pick a path like medicine, pharmacy or the rarefied world of investment banking or management consulting. Medicine is especially attractive for simple reasons -- the profession is highly regulated, experience is actually respected and rewarded, and the supply of medical school slots is kept low to ensure high salaries for people who put the work in. If you're smart enough and have a photographic memory, I can't see any reason why a young person today wouldn't try to get into medicine. We could use a lot more smart, talented people in IT. Another thing is working conditions, which could be improved in many places. That said, not every job involves 16 hour days banging out JavaScript in FrameworkOfTheMonth 0.9.1 while chugging Red Bull for a phone app; I've chosen to forego the highest possible salary to choose sane employers who understand work-life balance and actually appreciate my experience.

    I think that the body shops who are abusing the L-1 and H-1B programs should be stopped. Kicking out the ladder of entry level IT employment is a bad thing and will lead to executives feeling that the only way they can get competent people is hiring from these body shops. Once that's firmly in place at every company, the profession is pretty much doomed to a fate of hourly, gig economy contracts whose rates just keep dropping. So, preseve the pipeline of newbies -- give them work so they can learn how to do IT right.

  14. What? Did you assume you were immune? by Neuronwelder · · Score: 2

    Once the pendulum is set in motion it does not stop in mid swing. Millionaires will realize that they are not safe in a few years. The bigger fish gobble up the smaller fish. Just wait.

  15. Age Discrimination by lazarus · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm in the same situation right now, albeit I'm a -little- older than 63... Employers are not allowed to ask you questions related to your age, but it's pretty obvious when you forget and start relating sexism in the workplace to the synod of Rome in 850. The bigger issue (at least for me) seems to be that it doesn't matter if your 63 or 2022, employers are looking for young cheap people that have exactly the skills they think they need without considering the advantages of experience and adaptability. If they can't find that locally, they outsource.

    Seriously, you would think that 200 decades of experience would count for something, but no. It seems far more important that you are a tiny square peg they need to fill the tiny square hole they have. Sheesh.

    --
    I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
  16. Gov't doing visas wrong by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Been-there-done-that. The thing is, I can accept the idea that we have to compete on a global market, and brains are becoming a cheap commodity. We cannot stop the inevitable. It's not 1970 anymore.

    However, I think it's reasonable to shut the tech-visa door during a recession, which the US government did NOT. I lost two jobs during a recession when the 1st company croaked and the 2nd outsourced, and had to leave the state and my family to find work. I probably would have actually voted for T back then, *gulp*.

  17. I.T. in colleges .... by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think the original posted is absolutely correct, in his comment that, "I've observed that the average age is definitely older, and people have been here forever. Lots of my co-workers are stuck in their ways, and they have an attitude about their job + entitlements that only a person with no recent private sector work experience would have."

    My wife work in I.T. for a local community college and has observed the same thing. The head of networking has been there for YEARS. His area of expertise was Novell Netware, which is utterly obsolete today. Ever since he was forced to move to support Windows networks and servers, he's done nothing but screw things up and hold back needed change. (He won't implement basic security precautions because he keeps saying they aren't necessary. In reality, he's probably not confident he can implement any of them properly and doesn't want to be bothered to learn.)

    Another guy on the team was continually pushing updates out to systems that broke them, and then just going home, shrugging and saying, "Oops.... Oh well.... something to figure out later." Professors had to cancel classes in some cases, due to his negligence. Yet did they fire him? No! They just moved him to another area for a while, and now he's back, making the same mistakes again!

  18. Re: Obvious solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yes! I was born in Minnesota. I just got my HB1 visa approved last week and finally am back to work.

    You just need to get your workers visa. Sure, I'm a citizen already but having that HB1 credential means I am better than you. Period. And I require sponsorship now. But that's ok. Ill be able to work in the country I was born and raised in again.

    I love the HB1 visa program. My fellow USA citizens, apply for your visas today! You'll be back to work soon.

  19. It's worse by RubberDogBone · · Score: 2

    It's bad enough the school is doing this to their staff, but the school is ALSO charging students for curriculum which will prepare them to work the very same sort of jobs the school just outsourced.

    So not only are they screwing their people, they're robbing their customers too and sending them into a dead end.

    I'm not much of a protectionist. I think free trade is mostly a good thing. BUT I do think the US has a serious problem with H1-B and work visas in general. If you go to any other country, the process of getting in the country to work is MUCH MUCH harder. Canada, for example, will not allow someone in if they merely suspect the person is there to work and does not have a work visa and a sponsor. Even if they DO have a visa and a sponsor, the work in question has to be a job that NO Canadian can do. So if you take photos, for example, then you can't work there because clearly Canada has photographers who could do the work.

    The US makes no such restrictions. You can come here and take the job of an American even if we have lots of other qualified Americans ready and able to do that work. We don't care. Bring on the foreigners! This is ridiculous.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  20. They should have thought about it before now. by substance2003 · · Score: 2

    I don't mean to be insensitive here but when I see something in this article saying “Usually, they outsource the low-paying jobs” I'm thinking these people were fine with it since it didn't touch them. I have seen places where you can tell these high-level employees are fine with outsourcing and even thought it was normal that their company was saving money. They would have done something to defend the low paying jobs if they had understood it would eventually come for them. The lack of solidarity between tech workers is appalling I find. I'm not suggesting it would fix the underlying problem occurring here but it makes it hard for me to have sympathy for them.

    On the other side of this issue, what about the students? Are they still going to go to this school knowing it's telling them their future job won't be there because an H1B has it or will they stop registering for these courses to send a message to the school's administration? I'll bet they will still attend and give their borrowed money to get a diploma that won't mean anything to an employer who can get people on the cheap.

  21. Is it really that hard to find another job? by Karlt1 · · Score: 2

    Are they really saying that it is that hard for qualified IT folks to find another job somewhere in the whole U.S. with a similar salary/cost of living tradeoff. I know plenty of recruiters who would be salivating at the thought of 110 highly qualified people looking for a job.

    So the questions are:
    What exactly do they do?
    Have they kept their skills up and stayed marketable?

    One guy complained that even if he finds a job he may get laid off again in two years. What type of 80s mindset is that? Changing jobs for qualified IT people is like changing socks.

    Outsourcing could very well make it hard for *qualified* people to find a job in the future, but not today.

  22. H-1B Visas by zifn4b · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cue the propaganda about there being a worker shortage again. There is no worker shortage. There are workers lined up to work in IT. US companies have a champagne taste and a beer budget because that's what drives these insane profits on the stock exchange. The champagne is the American workers, the beer is the foreign workers for the most part with a few exceptions. This is why we need to suspend the H-1B Visa program because American companies will have no choice but to compromise. They certainly can afford it. I think it's only fair, the American people have been asked to compromise and compromise and then compromise again since 2008 to do their part to help the economy recover from The Great Recession. We've fulfilled that obligation now and it's time for us to get a slice of the historically enormous cash pile that has built up and been stored overseas to avoid repatriation.

    --
    We'll make great pets
    1. Re:H-1B Visas by zifn4b · · Score: 2

      We also need to get rid of corporate tax inversions. That's also coming. They are very un-American and only driven by greed.

      --
      We'll make great pets
  23. not even rock star by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 2

    A coworker in my former life was doing jobs of two for pitiful pay. One day when another coworker left, she was told to do the job of the departed in addition to the two she was handling. When she refused, she was written up for insubordination. A week later, she landed herself a job with normal work load and 50% increase in pay, and promptly left. That company ended up hiring three people each with higher than what she was paid to do the work she did.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  24. Re:Obvious solution by mea_culpa · · Score: 2

    You are not obligated to pay the mortgage or car payment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. The police are not going to arrest you if you walk away from it like they do in other countries. From the sounds of things you got divorced and have to pay child support. Well, so does every other American when they do the same thing. Tough shit and welcome to the club! Do what every other screwed over American does. Declare bankruptcy and walk away from the house and nice car you can no longer afford. Drive a beater and rent an affordable apartment until the kids grow up. Save money, spend the next few years taking up new hobbies and reevaluating your life choices. And for the love of God, spend quality time with your kids when it's your time for them!