Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OhioChick

(23,218 posts)
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 03:07 PM Apr 2014

An IT worker writes: 'Emotionally, we are broken'

April 25, 2014 11:39 AM EDT

Training your replacement must be an awful experience. It’s bad enough to lose a job. It’s an entirely different thing when you believe that U.S. government H-1B policies are assisting in the transfer of your job overseas.

Training your replacement must take enormous inner reserve.

There’s an IT professional who, at this moment, is training offshore replacements, the people who are taking over the work. This IT pro is also a good writer, and has penned a short explanation about what life is now like.

The name, employer, and everything else will remain anonymous.

The IT worker writes:

Letter here: http://blogs.computerworld.com/it-outsourcing/23833/it-worker-writes-emotionally-we-are-broken

84 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
An IT worker writes: 'Emotionally, we are broken' (Original Post) OhioChick Apr 2014 OP
Been there, done that, have the pink slip. nt Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #1
I'm so sorry. merrily Apr 2014 #18
Don't be, I'm happily back to work now Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #60
Great! Thanks for letting me know. merrily Apr 2014 #61
I think it's absolutely degrading to make an employee train his "replacement" whathehell Apr 2014 #66
Tell me about it. Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #67
What would have happened had you refused? whathehell Apr 2014 #69
Off of being laid off Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #72
I see what you're saying.. whathehell Apr 2014 #73
Yea, it sucks. Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #75
It certainly does...Like you, I don't blame whathehell Apr 2014 #78
The corporations, through their lobbyists, influenced government to change the laws Xipe Totec Apr 2014 #80
Me too, in 2002. Thor_MN Apr 2014 #20
And broken is our congress... ChromeFoundry Apr 2014 #2
Dont you think the Admin should be included? nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #3
The Admin doesn't set the H1B cap. (nt) jeff47 Apr 2014 #4
But of course. nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #5
Not a word about it exchanged with Nance or Harry or relevant committee chairs, either. merrily Apr 2014 #23
I should put in my signature line, "The above comments are in no way intended to reflect badly on rhett o rick Apr 2014 #28
"The admin" contains a lot of people in addition to the President. merrily Apr 2014 #30
Sorry but I missed the point. nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #31
The point is neither you nor I merrily Apr 2014 #35
The Admin is clueless on the impact of the program... ChromeFoundry Apr 2014 #9
Respectfully, how do you know that the Admin is clueless about merrily Apr 2014 #22
And it doesnt take a rocket scientist to recognized that no one is looking to rhett o rick Apr 2014 #32
When Bush said, "These are not jobs Americans want to do," merrily Apr 2014 #37
Do I understand you correctly? Are you an Ayn Rand fan? nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #45
People at DU are so perceptive. merrily Apr 2014 #46
You are giving me way too much credit. If you were being factious or sarcastic rhett o rick Apr 2014 #48
Oh, my. Did you think I was giving instructions or advice to employers? merrily Apr 2014 #50
I went back to my post. A critical word was missing from the last line. merrily Apr 2014 #51
Yes that is helpful. Thanks for clearing that up. nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #57
No worries. Got a kick out of the comment when I thought it was merrily Apr 2014 #59
Bill Clinton signed it into law (renewed it) in the late nineties.. whathehell Apr 2014 #65
Now that you mention it, I heard him too. Made no sense to me, especially given the merrily Apr 2014 #68
You are absolutely correct & Thomas Jefferson said it long ago.."The merchant has no patriotism" whathehell Apr 2014 #70
Attributed to Jefferson: merrily Apr 2014 #71
Okay, close enough. whathehell Apr 2014 #74
IBM workers trained their H-IB replacements HockeyMom Apr 2014 #6
training your replacements who are complete nitwits is the worst Skittles Apr 2014 #7
Getting a call at home because your replacement Treant Apr 2014 #12
what kills me is Skittles Apr 2014 #13
Exactly. Treant Apr 2014 #14
from what I can see, they simply lowered the standards Skittles Apr 2014 #64
Mmmmm, how sweet it is! merrily Apr 2014 #17
"anonymous" = Complicity Corruption Inc Apr 2014 #8
"anonymous" also can mean "has something of value to lose". ChromeFoundry Apr 2014 #10
When you train your own H1-B replacement it's self-evident there is no "skills shortage". pa28 Apr 2014 #11
Excellent points. merrily Apr 2014 #24
This story is so true SmittynMo Apr 2014 #15
Sorry for all you've gone through. merrily Apr 2014 #26
You can tinker around with Capitalism...... DeSwiss Apr 2014 #16
Thing is, we're the beast. merrily Apr 2014 #29
And yet..... DeSwiss Apr 2014 #52
Agree merrily Apr 2014 #58
I saw it coming mikeysnot Apr 2014 #19
We got double whammied in a similar vein. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2014 #42
When people that do not understand the medium mikeysnot Apr 2014 #81
It is not the government's fault. We cannot fall into that trap. The Stranger Apr 2014 #21
You can't fall into the trap that government has no responsiblity either. merrily Apr 2014 #39
No argument here about the enablers. The Stranger Apr 2014 #82
People in governments, local, state and federal can choose not to allow merrily Apr 2014 #83
I've been in IT for 17 years shawn703 Apr 2014 #25
I think the trap is that most companies Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2014 #36
Don't rely on your employer for training shawn703 Apr 2014 #53
I used to get very good English speakers when I called Mastercard and Comcast. merrily Apr 2014 #43
and just this month Hillary was calling for an increase in the H-1B limits antigop Apr 2014 #27
Having seen my job go to India twice, this is another reason I cannot support Hillary. djean111 Apr 2014 #33
and don't expect sympathy from the Third Way sycophants nt antigop Apr 2014 #38
Hello, preacher, choir here. merrily Apr 2014 #44
back in 2007 antigop Apr 2014 #40
Nothing that pays nearly as well, that's for sure. djean111 Apr 2014 #41
The article uses the word outsourcing, but sending jobs to India is offshoring. merrily Apr 2014 #47
But upthread I read that the admin has nothing to do with this Doctor_J Apr 2014 #63
If you have to train the H1-B replacements Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2014 #34
Let's see. Some are too menial or physically taxing for Americans to want to do. merrily Apr 2014 #49
Why do IT workers tolerate having to train their replacements? Brigid Apr 2014 #54
some companies force you to train your replacement if you want severance payment nt antigop Apr 2014 #55
Yep, that's what I thought. Brigid Apr 2014 #56
Mission Accomplished for the globalizers/1%. Doctor_J Apr 2014 #62
Sabotaging my replacement would be more like it. Ed Suspicious Apr 2014 #76
Been that way in the private sector for some time now. riqster Apr 2014 #77
No emotions are allowed in the IT Room Blue Owl Apr 2014 #79
The real H-1B numbers ticktockman Apr 2014 #84

Xipe Totec

(43,889 posts)
60. Don't be, I'm happily back to work now
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 09:00 AM
Apr 2014

Any company that's pulling these kinds of shenanigans is not a company worth working for.

I ended up in a much better position after it was all over.

It is a painful experience when it happens and I feel sympathy for anybody who has to go through it.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
61. Great! Thanks for letting me know.
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 09:13 AM
Apr 2014

I think you can still accept support for what you went through.

I know it's painful. A relative over 50 went through it. Over a year out of work. Almost lost his modest home, his wife and his son over it. And his emotional-wellbeing.

Now works two jobs and his wife who is very smart, but has a heavy accent and not much work experience, has to work in a laundromat, washing and folding, on her feet all day. No benefits whatever and she has to beg for a day off.

They still can't refinance the home, though, even though they missed only one payment one time. Therefore have been paying ridiculous interest at pre-2008 rates, while everyone else has been paying ridiculously low rates for years. He also had a mild stroke and had to pay for most of it because he was carrying only bare bones health insurance--and barely able to afford that. Can't win for losing.

Considers himself lucky though that they are working and have held onto to their little ranch home.

Did I mention he has a great mind, a great work ethic, a graduate degree and years of highly rated experience in his field?

Yeah, I know. He should have tried getting a license to drive a truck. He probably would have, if he and his wife didn't get anything. I just hope he stays healthy and employed until he hits retirement.

Xipe Totec

(43,889 posts)
67. Tell me about it.
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 08:00 PM
Apr 2014

Chinese replacements. In Beijing.

Sadly for them, it didn't work out nearly as well as they anticipated and they had to shut down the Beijing office two years after I left.

I cried all the way to the bank.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
69. What would have happened had you refused?
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 01:11 AM
Apr 2014

You "cried all the way to the bank"?...Are you saying you made money off the Beijing office closing?

Xipe Totec

(43,889 posts)
72. Off of being laid off
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 07:55 AM
Apr 2014

Six months severance plus I was forced to exercise stock options I would otherwise have held on to. If I had stayed, I would have kept the stock options as their value continued to decline. As it was, I found a job one month later with a 15% raise. In combination I made twice as much money that year than I would have normally made if I had kept my job.

That's what I mean by crying all the way to the bank.

If I had refused, I'm sure they would have found some convenient excuse to let me go earlier and without a severance package.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
73. I see what you're saying..
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 12:39 PM
Apr 2014

but it still sucks that they had the balls to make you train "replacements".

Xipe Totec

(43,889 posts)
75. Yea, it sucks.
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 06:17 PM
Apr 2014

I lay the blame at the feet of the corporation; a large DSP manufacturer.

The Chinese replacements were actually decent human beings trying to make a living and help their own families. They were as much pawns of geopolitical forces as I was. I actually made friends with some of them.

They are as much a part of the 99% as we are.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
78. It certainly does...Like you, I don't blame
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 06:41 PM
Apr 2014

the Chinese or the people of any other nation to whom corporations "outsource".

I blame the corporations, but I blame the government more...America used to have something

called "tariffs" which made it unprofitable for companies & manufacturers looking for cheap labor

overseas. If they made products abroad, they had a nice, big tax levied on the products they

then tried to sell here. Now that's decried as "protectionism" as if protecting your own industries

and workers was a bad thing. You may not be old enough to remember when it was actually MORE expensive

to buy foreign goods than domestic ones, but having been born in 1950, I'm not.

Imposing tariffs on foreign goods was routine American policy for most of its history, starting right after

the Revolution. It's something Thom Hartmann talks about a lot.

Xipe Totec

(43,889 posts)
80. The corporations, through their lobbyists, influenced government to change the laws
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 08:04 PM
Apr 2014

To make legal what they wanted to do to begin with.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
20. Me too, in 2002.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:15 PM
Apr 2014

Looking at my annual income, if I replace the Bush years with a straight line before/after, I'm missing over $120,000...

ChromeFoundry

(3,270 posts)
2. And broken is our congress...
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 03:27 PM
Apr 2014

They server the interests of corporations, not citizens.
Our congressional leadership gets a nice chunk of change from:

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg;
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates;
Microsoft former-CEO Steve Ballmer;
Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith,
LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman;
Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt;
Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer;
Dropbox CEO Drew Houston;
Tim Armstrong, CEO and Chairman, AOL, Inc.
Steve Chen, Co-founder, YouTube
Chris Cox, Vice President of Product, Facebook;
Reed Hastings, Founder and CEO, Netflix;
Kevin Systrom, CEO and Co-Founder, Instagram;
Padmasree Warrior, Chief Technology & Strategy Officer, Cisco;
Ron Conway, Special Advisor, SV Angel;
Sean Parker, Managing Partner, The Founders Fund;
Chamath Palihapitiya of the Social+Capital Partnership VC fund;
Joe Green, co-founder of the Causes Facebook app;
Jim Breyer of the Accel Partners VC fund;
Matt Cohler of the Benchmark VC fund;
John Doerr and Mary Meeker of the Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers VC fund;
Paul Graham, co-founder of the Y Combinator seed capital firm;
PayPal co-founder Max Levchin;
Aditya Agarwal, vice presient of engineering at Dropbox;
Ruchi Sanghvi, a former Facebook engineer who started a company later acquired by Dropbox.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
23. Not a word about it exchanged with Nance or Harry or relevant committee chairs, either.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:21 PM
Apr 2014

Ever.

The admin just worries about the INS, border security, etc.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
28. I should put in my signature line, "The above comments are in no way intended to reflect badly on
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:30 PM
Apr 2014

the President."

merrily

(45,251 posts)
30. "The admin" contains a lot of people in addition to the President.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:36 PM
Apr 2014

Don't think the signature line would make a bit of difference, though.

Just a wild guess.


merrily

(45,251 posts)
35. The point is neither you nor I
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:42 PM
Apr 2014

mentioned the President. Doesn't matter.

And I doubt the signature line would make a difference.

ChromeFoundry

(3,270 posts)
9. The Admin is clueless on the impact of the program...
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:42 PM
Apr 2014

They don't want to be involved unless it gives a good appearance and will drive up their approval ratings.
They are not clueless on how the program helps corporations profit and improve their personal portfolios.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
22. Respectfully, how do you know that the Admin is clueless about
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:18 PM
Apr 2014

the impact of the program?

It's such common knowledge and it's been an object of discussion since at least the Clinton admin, if not before.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that more people chasing a finite number of jobs is going to put Americans out of work and also likely lower wages.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
32. And it doesnt take a rocket scientist to recognized that no one is looking to
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:41 PM
Apr 2014

safe-guard American jobs. These job shifts benefit Corp-America (the big donors) at the expense of American workers.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
37. When Bush said, "These are not jobs Americans want to do,"
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:47 PM
Apr 2014

Last edited Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)

he meant, "These are not jobs that Americans want to do at the wages employers prefer to pay."

Supply and demand. Drive up the supply of workers, drive down the supply of jobs. Then sit back and see how little you have to pay and how badly you can treat them. And, unions? Don't make me laugh.

The fast food industry employees finally got tired of it and led the charge. Good for them.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
46. People at DU are so perceptive.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:15 PM
Apr 2014

If you let your guard down here for just one second, you get found out.

(Your dry humor is highly enjoyable.)

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
48. You are giving me way too much credit. If you were being factious or sarcastic
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:34 PM
Apr 2014

I wasnt smart enough to catch it. Enlighten me, if you will.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
50. Oh, my. Did you think I was giving instructions or advice to employers?
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:46 PM
Apr 2014

I was going on about how they think. I don't think you will find a more pro-worker poster. I just assumed you were joking. That is not usually my first reaction, either.

When I first saw your post, my total reply was going to be "More like John L. Lewis," but I could not remember his first name. All that was coming to me was Richard Lewis. I knew that was so wrong and didn't feel like googling.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
51. I went back to my post. A critical word was missing from the last line.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:57 PM
Apr 2014

Fast food industry employees.

If it had been there when you read the post, I think my intent would have been clearer.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
59. No worries. Got a kick out of the comment when I thought it was
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 04:12 AM
Apr 2014

satirical and I love laughing, so it all worked out.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
65. Bill Clinton signed it into law (renewed it) in the late nineties..
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 06:54 PM
Apr 2014

and I've heard Obama question, more than once, the wisdom of sending foreign students

graduating from our schools back home.

Answer: Um, so there might be some jobs for AMERICANS?...

In a time of recession, especially, this policy SUCKS!

merrily

(45,251 posts)
68. Now that you mention it, I heard him too. Made no sense to me, especially given the
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 08:12 PM
Apr 2014

economy. (Must have been a year ago when I heard him.)

If I study in Paris on my own dime, would Paris be unwise if I return home to the US?

Sure, if we are giving them scholarships, it might be unwise, but, then, I'd ask, why are we giving them scholarships to begin with?

I realize we give some isolated scholarships for humanitarian reasons or wider scholarships because we are investing in a nation. In the latter case, though, the whole point is to have the students return to their native land to help build it. Obama's biological father was himself part of that kind of program and he returned to Kenya.

Maybe POTUS Obama gave more of an explanation on other occasions but he did not offer them when I heard him and I could only shudder.

It's about many workers competing for few jobs to drive down salaries and drive up worker productivity because people are desperate for jobs and afraid to lose one if they were lucky enough to get it. It's also about workers from third world countries tending to be willing to take jobs for less American dollars than would an American. It's about workers way too scared to unionize or demand things from employers. It's about taking from workers any shred of backbone or bargaining power

Unless, as I said, someone has another explanation. And it's not that no Americans are skilled enough for the jobs. That is rw bs.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
70. You are absolutely correct & Thomas Jefferson said it long ago.."The merchant has no patriotism"
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 01:19 AM
Apr 2014

and that's what this country seems to have become -- just a bunch of "merchants", just another "market"

We citizens who fight the wars and pay the taxes get shit -- No loyalty, no gratitude, no nothing.

I'm truly disgusted.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
71. Attributed to Jefferson:
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 06:20 AM
Apr 2014

"Merchants have no country" or "The merchant has no country."

We citizens and taxpayers who are not in the top 10% of the wealthy don't get an excellent return on our taxes, I will agree to that extent. We do get some things. Lots of job opportunities are not currently among those things, though.

First, a lot of jobs "ran" South to get away from union friendly states. Then they "ran" overseas to get away from paying American workers a living wage and things like having to provide a safe workplace, like U.S. child labor laws, etc. They begrudge every penny paid in US taxes, too. And among those who made those kinds of decisions about their country and their fellow Americans are also among those who engage in the most jingoism.

whathehell

(29,050 posts)
74. Okay, close enough.
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 12:43 PM
Apr 2014

"We citizens and taxpayers who are not in the top 10% of the wealthy don't get an excellent return on our taxes, I will agree to that extent. We do get some things. Lots of job opportunities are not currently among those things, though


What kinds of things do you think we get, and how valuable are they if they don't include a way to make a living?

I agree with you on the economic traitors and their jingoism.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
6. IBM workers trained their H-IB replacements
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:20 PM
Apr 2014

My husband's been in the field (40 years) to have known people who that happened to YEARS ago.

Skittles

(153,138 posts)
7. training your replacements who are complete nitwits is the worst
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:27 PM
Apr 2014

I've heard about it many, many times

Treant

(1,968 posts)
12. Getting a call at home because your replacement
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:38 PM
Apr 2014

is incompetent after they've let you go?

Priceless. Even more priceless was advising that your consulting rate for them was $2,000 an hour, 10 hours due in advance, non-refundable.

Skittles

(153,138 posts)
13. what kills me is
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:40 PM
Apr 2014

they can still be clueless after FIVE YEARS

they have so much turnover because, well, THEY HAVE OPPORTUNITIES

sometimes when I'm asked why a situation is so fubar all I have to say is ONE word: OFFSHORE

Treant

(1,968 posts)
14. Exactly.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:42 PM
Apr 2014

It boggles the mind, but the number of competent offshore hires or offshore projects has been exactly zero.

How is it saving money to do something three times for half the price each time?

Skittles

(153,138 posts)
64. from what I can see, they simply lowered the standards
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 03:22 PM
Apr 2014

for example, problems that used to be fixed in 15 or 20 minutes - now it can take hours and that is the new norm

ChromeFoundry

(3,270 posts)
10. "anonymous" also can mean "has something of value to lose".
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:48 PM
Apr 2014

are you somewhat anonymous on DU?

I don't think that means you are a fictitious person or in a state of being involved with any wrongdoing... but maybe I'm wrong.

pa28

(6,145 posts)
11. When you train your own H1-B replacement it's self-evident there is no "skills shortage".
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:37 PM
Apr 2014

This program has turned into just another way to systematically rob American workers of a secure job and line the pockets of corporate megadonors.

As long as the public is willing to accept the absence of a social contract the screwing will continue.

SmittynMo

(3,544 posts)
15. This story is so true
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:58 PM
Apr 2014

I have been in IT my entire life. Jobs are very hard to come by now a days. Over the past 7 years I have seen up's and down's like you wouldn't believe. I have been unemployed more than employed. Finding full time work with benefits is extremely difficult. Add to the fact that I'm 58 makes it even harder.All that's out there is contract work. Once the contract is over, you're toast, and have to start over, sometimes taking months to find your next gig. I have been without work now for 9 months, looking hard as hell every day. The only thing that has saved me(us) is that my wife works, but she wants to retire and get out of the rat race. She is older than I am. Then out of the clear blue, a friend from 15 years ago, reached out to me, found me a job, and I landed a 6 month gig, with the possibility of going full time after that. I am so grateful that this happened. If I go full time, my wife can retire. Lord only knows what would have happened if this wasn't to be. Believe me, it's very tough out there. The economy is a long way from recovering.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
26. Sorry for all you've gone through.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:30 PM
Apr 2014

It's great that you got the temporary position. Hoping with all my heart that it goes permanent, even before the six months are up.

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
16. You can tinker around with Capitalism......
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:03 PM
Apr 2014

....and make it seem fairer. You can even hybridize it into a kind of social/democracy with a Capitalism Cherry on top, but this behavior is inherent in the beast. It's made this way and it is only doing what it is designed to do: ''Make the most profits possible irrespective of anything or anyone else.''

This demonstrates quite clearly that Capitalism has run its course. And so we can expect to see more and more of this. When TPP passes it'll get even worse. And once the Internets and Net Neutrality are dead concepts, we will be theirs for the taking.

- That is, if we don't stop it.

K&R


In most capitalist enterprises, and certainly most major corporations that dominate capitalist economies, the organization of work is highly stratified. At the top are the major shareholders, typically ten to twenty people who own major blocks of shares in the company. Because of that, they have the voting power of all those shares and that gives them the authority under the law to select the board of directors, between fifteen and twenty people.

Together, the major shareholders and the board, thirty to forty people, make all of the decisive decisions in a corporation: What the company will produce, how, where, and, finally, what to do with the profit the enterprise generates. The vast majority of workers in a capitalist enterprise are required to live with the results of all of the decisions that are made by a tiny minority.

Q: What’s the alternative?

A cooperative enterprise is the key alternative to a traditional capitalist enterprise. All the workers, whatever they do inside an enterprise, have to be able to participate in collectively arriving at the decisions about what, how, where to produce, and what to do with the profits in a democratic way. One person, one vote should decide how these things are done.

The reason why we’re interested in making a transition from the top-down capitalist organization of enterprises to a radically different cooperative or democratic organization is simple: We believe the capitalist organization of production has now finished its period of usefulness in human history. It is now no longer able to deliver the goods.

It’s bringing profits and prosperity to a tiny portion of the population, and delivering not the goods but the “bads” to most people. Jobs are steadily more insecure, unemployment is high and lastingly high, benefits are increasingly being reduced, and the prospects for our children are even worse, as more of them go deeper and deeper in debt to get the degrees that do not provide them with the jobs and incomes to get out of that debt.

The crisis we endure is the product of an economic system whose organization is something we should question, debate, and change.

~Richard Wolff, Professor Emeritus, UMass link

merrily

(45,251 posts)
29. Thing is, we're the beast.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:32 PM
Apr 2014

We personify corporations, saying they are greedy. But, no, they aren't. The people who run them, on the other hand.....

merrily

(45,251 posts)
58. Agree
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 03:13 AM
Apr 2014

We have to fight our own acquisitive nature.

Media focus on celebrities and lifestyles of the rich and famous is not helping. Shows about very expensive homes, very expensive hotels, very expensive fashion, etc. Hours of broadcasting before award shows showing designer clothes, shows and jewels. It's approaching cult worship of costly things and those who can acquire as much as they want of them without blinking.
'

mikeysnot

(4,756 posts)
19. I saw it coming
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:15 PM
Apr 2014

we were losing the contract but did not know it yet, I picked up on it, the manager for the firm didn't realize she was letting the cat out of the bag.

I had to do a bunch of recording training sessions for processes and procedures in front of a live online audience.

The manager did not know "how or what" was being done, so when I asked them to outline what they need for each session, I did just that. And only that.

So there were massive holes of information in the sessions. They got no extras, no explanations and no details. I gave them what they asked for. I know that these tutorial vid's would be of no help to anyone that did not know the system to begin with....

When the contract renewal* time came up and they were forced not to sign with us it made sense why I made the videos, even though I knew but didn't know for sure.

I waited a while and dropped her a line, since I did 100% of all the jobs for their 18 channels for 5 years prior and see if they needed any help. I knew them inside and out. She seemed interested and it got to pay. She asked if I can do templates for them because the firm they have now was struggling.... gee I wonder why?

So she asks if I could do it for 15 bucks.... I was like thinking in my head, "ok maybe I can turn these out just for easy cash...." SO I say 15 bucks an hour.... No for the whole job... pause. silence...

These templates from construction to means testing to approval can take just for me 2-3 hours of time for one.... so in a sense I would be working for them for 5-7 dollars an hour. I politely declined.

Where was the company located. India.

* We did not lose the client, another company that we worked together with told them to go with their firm for our services or they would drop them... The company could not afford to lose them so we went. This was our companies major cash cow and it alone covered our operating costs, etc. Our company did not last long after that.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
42. We got double whammied in a similar vein.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:58 PM
Apr 2014

We were a small company with only a couple of large contracts, so we were very attentive to adding all sorts of specializations to our systems as the clients brought new needs to us. But then one of the companies decided they *had* to have a core functionality change that essentially forced us to rewrite more than half of the software we'd spent almost a decade developing at that point, and wanted a freakishly short deadline that didn't let us adequately test the changes, as well as forcing us to be far less responsive to the needs of the other large client and the smaller ones at the same time that the other client wanted us to start integrating our system with another outfit they felt did nicer front-ends. Then the first organization had a management change, and the new people didn't want to learn our systems, and instead spent something like 4-5 times as much as ours buying the systems they were used to from another company that had far less functionality.

We never really recovered and finally the boss simply washed his hands of the mess, selling the rights to use and modify our code to the remaining client while they supposedly worked to switch over to something else. Years later, they were still using our system, having blown past their own deadlines for switching because they simply didn't realize you couldn't just create so much functionality overnight on a shoestring.

The Stranger

(11,297 posts)
21. It is not the government's fault. We cannot fall into that trap.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:18 PM
Apr 2014

It is multi-national corporations and their 1% that is doing this.

Hoi polloi is being brainwashed into hating the government.

Meanwhile, hiding behind the curtain pulling the strings are the Kochs, the 1% and Big Corp.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
39. You can't fall into the trap that government has no responsiblity either.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:54 PM
Apr 2014

It has plenty. Corporations don't enact immigration laws.

Not only that, but go ahead, blame it all on corporations and exonerate the people whose votes you put in office and whose salaries you pay to represent your interests and to legislate and regulate in your interests. Now what? You own enough shares in a multinational corporation to direct policy or fire the board of directors? If so, God Bless. But even then, don't forget your legislative enablers.

The Stranger

(11,297 posts)
82. No argument here about the enablers.
Mon Apr 28, 2014, 11:31 AM
Apr 2014

But the 1% have so craftily and intentionally set up the government as the cover for their massive appropriation of the people's wealth that we must constantly beware of this ruse, and even more constantly try to awaken those who have fallen into it.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
83. People in governments, local, state and federal can choose not to allow
Mon Apr 28, 2014, 02:00 PM
Apr 2014

the 1% to set them up. They are well-compensated adults, not little kids or robots. They have the choice to legislate on behalf of the 100%, just as they supposed to.

And, on the federal level, at a minimum, many of them ARE in the 1%. There is a reason that Bernie Sanders didn't get rich after hitting D.C. and so many others did. Not to mention that a lot of them arrived as members of the 1%.

You can't pressure your Rep or Senator very much on your own, but get a group together and you just might. Though they have little to fear, since voted out means only that they get a very well paying, and still powerful job as a lobbyist or a member of a think tank.

Look at Dodd. Head of the motion picture association? Really? What was his great qualification to head that, other than his contacts in federal government?

On the other hand, even boycotts, assuming we had the wherewithal to organize a large one, would not hurt the Koch's. Their billions much earned more while I was typing this than some busboy earns all year.


I guess we just see this very differently.

shawn703

(2,702 posts)
25. I've been in IT for 17 years
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:30 PM
Apr 2014

I can honestly say I have never seen this happen, at any company I have worked for. It's hard enough to find people with the necessary skills in the first place, including the communication skills that most H-1B workers would lack.

The part where I think a lot of people fall down in this field is not understanding that you will need to keep up with advances in technology. I know cloud engineers are in pretty high demand at the moment. It might not be that way in ten years, but in ten years another IT skill will be in pretty high demand.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
36. I think the trap is that most companies
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:46 PM
Apr 2014

don't want to actively take the time to train their own employees in what they want. They only want to hire people who magically already fulfill some need, then keep them working on that aging need without bothering to retrain them in newer needs because they know they can find someone cheaper who is being trained on someone else's dime to come in and do the next job that needs done.

It's more profitable in the short term to simply squeeze what you can out of workers and discard them.

shawn703

(2,702 posts)
53. Don't rely on your employer for training
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:33 PM
Apr 2014

In my 17 years an employer has sent me to technical training twice. Self study is the only really reliable way to learn something new, and IT workers should plan on continuously studying pretty much their entire career.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
43. I used to get very good English speakers when I called Mastercard and Comcast.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:01 PM
Apr 2014

Recently, I'm getting people with very thick accents. I grew up listening to thick accents all around me, but I am having trouble understanding this batch.

Not only that but the Comcast reps are operating either from home or from an incredibly noisy place. Yelling and clatter in the background on both occasions I called recently, one of which was to get support on my broadband connection.


This is offshoring, not HB 1, but it is in reaction to your comment on communication skills. For some purposes, employers seem more than willing to risk it.

antigop

(12,778 posts)
27. and just this month Hillary was calling for an increase in the H-1B limits
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:30 PM
Apr 2014
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryadolan/2014/04/08/hillary-clinton-comes-to-san-francisco-talks-tech-immigration-and-whether-shell-run-for-office/

Hillary Clinton came to San Francisco Tuesday and filled the house at a marketing conference, where she was the keynote speaker. Clinton discussed topics ranging from immigration reform and Vladimir Putin’s misdeeds to incorporating social media in the State Department and instilling a willingness at the Department to take risks.
....
Asked by Marketo’s Fernandez about how she would deal with the shortage of H-1B visas, which tech companies rely in to bring in non-U.S. workers such as computer engineers, she suggested thinking longer term and working with colleges –using cash from Silicon Valley – to train people in the U.S. to fill those jobs, while in the shorter term pressing for more H-1B visas.


I wonder how much they paid her for that speech.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
44. Hello, preacher, choir here.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:05 PM
Apr 2014

Or posters whose bread is buttered on the center right side, one way or another.

Some of the things I see on this board are so over the top, I have to believe that someone's ability to feed his or her kids is involved somehow.

Don't mind feeding kids in the least, but crikey, if it's anything short of that, I'd be surprised.

ETA: Until recently, I would see posts like this one from one side or the other, and think. "I wish they'd stop posting about each other and stick to the issues."

Now, I get it.

I get it.

I get it.

antigop

(12,778 posts)
40. back in 2007
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:55 PM
Apr 2014
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702780.html

But the Clinton camp has been pressed by labor leaders on her support for expanding temporary U.S. work visas that often go to Indians who get jobs in the United States, and it has been queried about the help she gave a major Indian company to gain a foothold in New York state. That company now outsources most of its work to India.

"They're obviously defensive about it," observed Lee, who has taken part in such meetings.

Clinton declined repeated requests for an interview about her views on outsourcing. Her campaign advisers, however, say she believes there are no inconsistencies in the comments she has made here and in India or in her actions as a senator.

They say she opposes legislative measures -- such as trade barriers -- to slow the loss of American jobs if they would restrain free trade. And they say she has supported the expansion of the temporary-worker visas because U.S. technology companies have repeatedly told her the visas are needed to maintain a ready workforce.

At the same time, they say, she has worked hard to secure money to assist workers who have lost jobs to outsourcing and wants to retrain the American workforce to compete better in the global marketplace.


I'm still waiting for her to tell us what, exactly, laid off engineers and IT people are supposed to train for.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
47. The article uses the word outsourcing, but sending jobs to India is offshoring.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:30 PM
Apr 2014

Makes it clearer that the job is leaving the country, so I like it better.

An older woman was telling me about her daughter, who had been unemployed for a long time and unable to find work. I responded that I hoped her daughter was making good use of the time, such as geting training. The woman put me right in my place.

"Please, people train for one kind of work after another that disappears or becomes obsolete. I remember when employers used to provide new employees with on the job training, while they were getting paid. Whatever happened to that?"



And they say she has supported the expansion of the temporary-worker visas because U.S. technology companies have repeatedly told her the visas are needed to maintain a ready workforce.



Are we supposed to believe that Hillary actually believes the companies when they allegedly tell her that? I guess she has to say something.

The positions of the unions would weigh heavily with Democrats, especially when they coincide with the positions of big business. The Clinton Morris dream scenario.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
34. If you have to train the H1-B replacements
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:42 PM
Apr 2014

then why the hell should anyone believe that there is any reason for the visas than to replace Americans with cheaper foreigners?

A) the people doing the training can already do the work, and B) other Americans could just as easily be trained to do the work.

In the first year or two I worked as a DBA/programmer, the small start-up company I worked for started getting emails from overseas programming companies trying to sell the boss on replacing me with their coders. In the 12 or so years I worked for him, even though my salary went up quite a bit, I never actually got to the point where the foreign offers from the first few years were lower than what I was paid the entire time I was there... According to industry standards, at my highest, I think I made something like 1/3 of what the 'average' coder of my experience and skillset did

merrily

(45,251 posts)
49. Let's see. Some are too menial or physically taxing for Americans to want to do.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:38 PM
Apr 2014

The rest of the jobs Americans are not skilled enough to do.

What a bunch of slackers and incompetents we are! Geez. No wonder the country has been on the ropes. Once again, we have met the enemy and he is us.

I hope politicians, big business and lobbyists will all forgive me for unjustly blaming them for so long.


ETA

Brigid

(17,621 posts)
54. Why do IT workers tolerate having to train their replacements?
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 09:33 PM
Apr 2014

I think I know, but I want to see if I'm right.

riqster

(13,986 posts)
77. Been that way in the private sector for some time now.
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 06:33 PM
Apr 2014

Sorry to hear it's hitting the Federal workforce as well.

ticktockman

(69 posts)
84. The real H-1B numbers
Mon Apr 28, 2014, 11:38 PM
Apr 2014

Look at the first graph and first table at http://econdataus.com/h1binfo.htm and the four articles linked to after that table and you'll see a large portion of H-1Bs go to outsourcing firms. The last article shows that those firms tend to hire many more lower-skilled workers (such as bachelor degrees) than major tech companies. Regarding H-1B workers going on to get green cards, it says the following:

The analysis looked at the five major recruiters of guest workers in the industry -- Microsoft, Intel Corp. (NASDAQ:INTC), Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL), Amazon.com Inc. (NASDAQ:AMZN) and Qualcomm (NASDAQ:QCOM) -- and found that between 2010 and 2012, an average of 65 percent of guest workers at these companies were given green cards. The percentage of guest workers who came to the U.S. through outplacement companies was much lower, between zero and 12 percent depending on the firm.

Hence, large portions, if not a large majority, of H-1B visa workers do not become citizens. If you look at http://econdataus.com/svworkers.html , you'll see that about half of the software developers in Silicon Valley are non-citizens (a proxy for H-1B workers), about a quarter are naturalized citizens, and about a quarter are citizens by birth. Hence, H-1B visa workers are being used for run-of-the-mill programming jobs, not just for jobs requiring specialized knowledge.

As far as what the government could do, they could put a limit on the percentage of H-1B workers per company. Then companies would likely use more of their allotment to truly obtain special talent and not just engage in an arms race for cheap labor. Companies should still have to justify the H-1Bs but, as the articles state, companies have found many ways to get around those rules. I suspect that this problem may not get addressed until the CEO jobs start getting outsourced via strong foreign firms that start eating the lunch of our big companies like Microsoft and Facebook. Then, rather than calling for more H-1B visas, the successors of Bill Gates and Zuckerberg will likely start calling for government intervention and that all of us Americans, management and workers alike, pull together as a team. Their money will buy support in Washington and then something will get done. I only hope that we don't have to wait that long.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»An IT worker writes: 'Emo...