Laid-Off Abbott IT Workers Won't Have To Train Their Replacements (computerworld.com) 284
dcblogs writes: An angry letter from Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) protesting Abbott Labs' IT employee layoff may be having an impact, but not the way the senator wanted. The layoffs are part of plan by Abbott to shift some IT work to India-based Wipro, a major user H-1B visas, and Abbott is proceeding with the cuts despite Durbin's plea "to reconsider this plan and retain these U.S. workers." Abbott put the number of impacted IT employees at "fewer than 150." Durbin's letter has it at 180. But Abbott may be making changes in how the layoffs are conducted. IT employees, who only spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they were initially told they would be training replacements. But Abbott said Friday that the "affected Abbott IT employees are not being asked to train their replacements." The firm's statement appears to confirm the latest employee accounts of what's going on. One worker said the replacement training may be limited to employees who aren't losing their jobs. The training of replacements was a major issue for Durbin. In his letter to the firm, Durbin wrote: "To add insult to injury, the Abbott Labs IT staff who will be laid off will first be forced to train their replacements."
Sit back and enjoy (Score:5, Insightful)
The sheer capacity of a whole nation to harm itself repeatedly in the name of a long debunked economic fantasy is, as always, astounding.
This is why America needs President Trump (Score:4, Funny)
This is why America needs, and will get, President Trump. Every now and then America needs a savior. It the past it has needed great leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and John F. Kennedy, and such people have always arrived at just the right time. America once again needs a real leader to give it direction and to show it the way, and that leader is President Trump. He is controversial because he is right. America needs to once again put Americans first, even if this means putting in place economic trade barriers, immigration barriers, and even physical walls. President Trump will lead America to a greatness it hasn't sen since the days of JFK.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Germany needed a savior too, and it got one. At the risk of false Godwin accusations, it was Adolf Hitler.
I don't think Trump himself is extraordinarily evil (being a businessman, a certain amount of evil is necessary and he has more than enough of that). I cannot say as much, however, for many of those he attracts to his flag, and he hasn't been very diligent in chastising them. I worry that he'd prove the old adage about power corrupting.
What we really need more than a charismatic savior is for the variou
Re: (Score:2)
Which, of course, Trump will not do. Trump puts Trump first, last, and always. When he even bothers to lie about it it's so transparent as to be pathetic.
Believe it or not you're right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is an American Inevitability.
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:2)
You're right. Hillary Clinton is the true Savior.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes ... but is he an idiot conning the people. Or a nut trying to con the moneyed stakeholders running this mess?
Either way he's a better bet that what we have.
H. Clinton will double down on this continued economic and foreign policy nightmare. Not to mention the continuous onslaught against person freedom and privacy.
My hope is that Trump is arrogant enough and dumb enough to do whatever the bleep he wants because he thinks his handlers can't destroy him. Either that or we get more of the same .. what do w
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There doesn't always have to a be a "no good choice" there can be a "choice that is the lesser of all evils."
Good. Keep telling yourself that, citizen.
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:2)
when those are your choices you're basically telling us you're too ignorant to realize that you shouldn't have to make bad choices. You're the definition of voter apathy.
If your choice is to lose an arm or a leg, well maybe you shouldn't have to accept either option.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Is that anything like Dick Cheney outing an undercover CIA agent and lying about it?
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:2)
Isn't Bernie talking about supporting Americans too? How are his policies going to destroy America. They might destroy quite a few parasitic health insurance corporations but I'm not seeing that as a bad thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't try you'll never know now will you?
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:2)
I don't think monopoly means what you think it's means. Mono means one. You can't have multiple drug monopolies.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure you can. Plural drugs with singular company controlling them in the plural sense. You can have a monopoly on drug X and I can one drug Y. We are still monopolies.
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:2)
Providing universal education for children is very expensive too but it more than pays for itself by providing a more skilled workforce. It's not perfect but it's far better than what existed before. Likewise forcing young adults to take on huge debts to get a further education limits their potential to contribute more effectively to society, either by not going or by having very little disposable income. You're right about the problem of getting the rich to pay for the society they depend on to make them r
Re:This is why America needs President Trump (Score:5, Funny)
He even offshore his wives.
Re: This is why America needs President Trump (Score:3, Interesting)
It's amazing that you can substitute Obama for Trump in your statement and it still makes total sense.
Cheers (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably should have organized instead of acting like they unique Libertarian snowflakes like half of the IT staff I've every worked with, who were convinced they were the best and didn't want to be dragged down to the level of their fellow man.
I guess the ones that were the best are now training their replacements.
Re:Cheers (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah,its a marvel how supposedly smart IT workers are not as smart as their blue-collar parents that knew that without a union, they were going to get shit and shoved in it. If you are an employee of any type, you need a union or you're going to get screwed, its that simple. So just continue being high and mighty, and go get in line at the unemployment office. Oh, and vote for Trump, who will end this crap.
Unions have major problems too (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest problem with IT workers is that they feel that their work and effort is not being recognized, and their pay and benefits are not being proportional to the effort and intelligence put in.
Unions will not fix that problem, but hinder it, as the top employee will be treated the same as the lazy and/or inadequate employee. As well Unions tend to have a wider agenda and will expand to beyond just your field, and to a wider scope. When it comes to negotiations they will agree on such things such as laying off the few high salary people in order to get twice as many cheaper employees, as they will bring in more money for dues.
Also with a Union shop, you learn to keep your mouth shut for any ideas that may be against the union, otherwise you are in trouble.
I have worked in unioned and non-unioned shops. Unions make sense for blue-collar jobs, because such jobs easily replaceable and are open to abuse towards a persons health and safety.
Government/Teaching jobs also does make sense for Unions because of the fickle nature of elected officials who are in charge, who may want to fire a teacher for failing the Football star so he can't win the big game. Or having the son of a member of the house of representative in detention for abusing an other student.
White-Collar jobs such as IT have much less health and safety concerns, and it is expensive to replace a good IT worker. Also most companies really fail miserably when they try to outsource, and in time they bring back local workers. Also IT workers can often find jobs in less time then blue collar workers.
I was Laid off in 2008, I was able to get an other job rather quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
IT has become that on both counts in many places where very long hours for months are expected.
Re:Unions have major problems too (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying that the CEO of a company really puts in 800x the effort? Where does he get time for that 32,000 hour work week and still find time to perfect his golf swing?
Why do people keep bringing this up? It isn't about effort. It is about how little they can pay to get someone who is perceived to have the capability they need. Do you think that the person who answers the level 1 help desk line and reads off a script should make as much as the network architect? What if they both work the same number of hours? Do you think that the person who images the new PCs that come in should make as much as the person who runs the data center? Once you concede that point, it i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't about effort or intelligence. It's about supply and demand and the impact of doing a good vs. a great job.
Anyone who is not severely disabled can clean a toilet so the supply of those with that capability dramatically exceeds the demand and the pay is low. If the toilet is not cleaned perfectly or it takes one person 5% longer to clean it than another, the impact on the organization owning the toilet is not perceivable so there's little reason to pay someone much more because they are a little bett
Re: (Score:2)
Put a shitty CEO like that of Nokia in your company and you tell me his work is not more important?
Sorry but we are not all that unless we work for an IT company. That is economic reality. You do not raise the share price. You do not increase sales. You do not make the product your employer sells so why should they pay you? What makes you so special?
The chef at a Chillis brings in millions each year. In comparison you as a sys admin cost money and the only reason you are not paid minimum wage is an outage c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Unions have major problems too (Score:5, Insightful)
Work smart, not hard.
Every company says to "work smarter, not harder". But god forbid they catch you not working harder.
Re: (Score:2)
"The biggest problem with IT workers is that they feel that their work and effort is not being recognized, and their pay and benefits are not being proportional to the effort and intelligence put in. Unions will not fix that problem, but hinder it, as the top employee will be treated the same as the lazy and/or inadequate employee"
Is it not that you said that IT workers *as a class* have these and these claims? How is it not that bargaining also as a whole can't result into a better output?
"Unions make sen
Re: (Score:3)
But really, even your assumptions about what a union will do is flawed. Haven't you ever seen how trade unions work in skilled labor?
Re: (Score:2)
True to a degree, but way off the mark in practice. The baseline treatment of employees is the same, with high performing ones earning bonuses, glowing reviews that lead to promotions, and consideration for increased training.
While this may be true in some unions, I have never seen it in practice. I have friends in plumber, waste management, and teacher unions, and all of them have very uniform pay scales that hardly adjusts to individual performance at all. Maybe they have a 10% differences from poor performing coworkers with similar tenure, but without unions it can often be 50%-100% more. And for people with the exact same position, education, experience, etc, the only difference being the leverage a highly skilled worker has
Re: (Score:2)
You might be awesome at what you do, and you may even have actual hard proof of this. Unfortunately, none of that matters when you get an idiot director or CEO who thinks that IT people are totally interchangeable and all have the same skill set. Your proof of worth will never even be considered by such people.
Then you stop ignoring the recruiters who send over at least 5 jobs offers per week, or call back your friends who keep asking you if you are available for a job, and get a new job by the end of the month. Job security should not come from forcing someone to employ you. It should come from being highly employable in the marketplace.
The job security that comes from being at the same company from 20 years is an illusion. True job security comes from working 5 different jobs in 20 years, and having the experie
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not but Trump has been a perpetrator of such crap.
Sick of the USA having to act as world policeman due to being the leading nation? Then vote Trump so those Chinese can get a taste of what it's like to be on top - that will show them!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, Trump has done some of those things as a businessman, but he didn't necessarily like it, it was just forced upon him if he wanted to win the bid.
Its like the founding fathers. Some were even slave owners, but every last one of them hated the institution of slavery, and wanted to abolish it. They couldn't, tho, or they wouldn't have been able to form a union of states amongst the southern states which depended on slaves to operate their great plantations. There would have been less than 13 colonies
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Yeah, Trump has done some of those things as a businessman, but he didn't necessarily like it, it was just forced upon him if he wanted to win the bid."
So, you mean that once in government, he will sell himself to the big corporations, not that he necessarily like it, but because it's just forced upon him if he wanted to win his golden retirement.
"Its like the founding fathers. Some were even slave owners, but every last one of them hated the institution of slavery, and wanted to abolish it."
Yes, because,
Re: Cheers (Score:2)
We don't have crumbling infrastructure. Obama spent a trillion dollars to fix the infrastructure just a few years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
What's hilarious to me is how so many of these same people panicking now don't give two shits about illegals flooding in from our southern borders and depressing the low-skilled jobs market (yay! cheap nannies, housekeepers, and gardeners!), but are now howling because the exact same thing is happening to THEIR jobs. The only exception that these foreign workers are sanctioned by the US H1B program rather than simply being ignored by our policy makers at the top.
Democrats and Republicans, I'm sad to say, a
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and vote for Trump, who will end this crap.
+5 Non sequitur.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your general sentiment that IT workers tend to live in some kind of libertarian paradise that doesn't exist sometimes. Many even don't want government funding for projects and companies. That might be an ideal (depending on your political ideology), but there's no point a martyr industry. Healthcare, education, law, medicine... mega bucks by government and regulations. So what if try to keep a piece of the pie to ourselves.
The problem is that unionizing doesn't work for private sector workers a
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I work in tech, and my wife is (was) a teacher. She was forced to join a union she didn't want to join. She was forced to take a deduction from her paycheck to pay for a union she had no interest in supporting. That union stalled pay negotiations for years so she never got a raise, despite getting stellar performance reviews. She was screwed over by her management on more than one occasion, and the union did exactly zero to help her. Let me repeat that - they literally shrugged and said she was on her own.
Re:Cheers (Score:5, Insightful)
Trade barriers and walls never made anyone more productive and wealthy
I'm not entirely sure about that. Every time we reduce trade barriers, things seem to get worse. We lose jobs, products get shittier, wages go down, and prices still go up. The only thing that's gotten better overall is electronics/tech, and that's probably in spite of what's happening.
"Free" trade made sense when shipping costs meant that it was still profitable to produce goods locally and you only bought from other nations what you couldn't produce yourselves. When shipping is almost free, and labor in another country is almost free, when that other country doesn't make you properly dispose of environmental waste or treat workers like human beings, how can you possibly compete?? You can't. This outsourcing will continue until America is nothing but a shadow of its former self. Do you really want the majority of the people living in huts and on the streets like in India?
Some love to say that people just need to get into "more creative" jobs, but ignore that fact that it's statistically impossible for any significant portion of the people to do that. Not just due to ability, but if you do get that situation, creative jobs will no longer pay a living wage. Even if you can get 30% of the workforce into these positions, are you just going to throw the other 70% overboard?
Why is it that in the 50's, you could have a single family member working a blue collar job, while still having enough to buy a modest house, a car, and the ability to feed and raise 6 kids, yet 60 years of "progress" later, there's no way in hell that is possible. The excuse these days is that people buy way too much house and spend money on junk. To a degree, that's true, but even if you didn't have cell phone, cable, and 2 brand new cars, you still couldn't live like they could in the 50's.
I think free trade is a great idea, IF all countries are playing on the same level. That's not the case, so what's the solution?
Re: Cheers (Score:2)
We don't really ever reduce trade barriers. Democrats like to make trade "deals" which really mean hamstringing American business, giving away the farm to nations "in need", and fucking over American companies that just want to easily sell their products overseas while keeping the company in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trade barriers and walls never made anyone more productive and wealthy
But why do you think the goal should be more productivity and more wealth? Trade barriers and such offer job security, which in turn causes lots of other securities to arise. It fulfills the first two base levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs [wikipedia.org]. Sure, once those two levels are provided for one can add extra flexibility and degrees of freedom in the system so as to provide for the top levels, but if your current policy is damaging those two, you're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
My point is that ability to produce dollars does not make a wealthy economy, it is ability to produce goods and services that makes a wealthy economy and this ability is destroyed by government monopolising the power over money and then destroying the value of money.
Yes, I agree. I know a lot of classic liberal and libertarian economics, from Bastiat to Hoppe, passing through Mises and Hayek. I agree with their economics, I think praxeology describes pretty well most of economic activity.
That said, I disagree with them in one point. They show pretty well how the economy can, by means of non-State intervention in it, lead to maximal productivity and wealth. But they fail to show why this is desirable. If you question this desirability, and replaces it by something else,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cheers (Score:2)
Started? They have been doing that for 75 years.
Re: (Score:2)
What magical moments will cause this to happen and why hasn't it already happened? What you described as the conditions for you to start has been going on for a long time already.
Of course it is already happening. Its the small businesses in America today. You are essentially saying that if things continue the same way they have been, you will join the club and do as things have been happening.
Or did I miss something in your proclamation to save the country?
Re: (Score:2)
See, everyone can talk about their good ideas. Very, very few can execute on them - so can you do it or not?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You need to purchase a whole new PC"
The move to cloud and virtualization means that more and more often this is going to be the cheapest solution.
Re: (Score:2)
You'll get "Oh, have you tried turning it off and on? Oh that didn't work? You need to purchase a whole new PC".
Unfortunately, this is an economic truth now. When a fair PC is $500 bucks, it makes little sense to pay $100s an hour to fix it, unless it serves a highly specialized purpose, which is rare.
Re: (Score:2)
Um...ya...
I've with unions ( as IT ), and I've worked without. I *vastly* prefer without. Unions may provide job stability ( after you've been there long enough to have seniority on younger staff, mind you ), but then IT doesn't exactly get raises by being loyal anyway.
Unions only protect those who don't want to be bothered developing themselves to be more valuable, in my experience.
Re: (Score:2)
What would've been the difference? Organized laborers not only get laid off all the time, they get laid off even quicker due to the fact that they are more expensive and less productive than any other laborer. The IT would still go to India, the workers may suggest they would go on 'strike' which would give them reason to lay them off even faster.
Unions are no longer the organizations they were in the early 1900's, now they are just a dues-collecting layer of middle-management that will go along with whatev
Re: (Score:2)
And forgo the chance to screw up the training of your replacement to the point where they have to spend thrice the money to sensibly train him?
Rest assured I'd make perfectly sure that after my kind of "training" my replacement would have such a messed up mix of half-bogus, completely bogus and correct information that it becomes near impossible for him to, even after retraining, know what's right and what's wrong.
Fuck you. If you force me to train my replacement, I will guarantee you that you will have to
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
New guy: Wait, you said you still use token ring?
You: No, Tolkien Ring. It rules them all. And we only use that in the data center. Everywhere else uses ATM.
New guy: Asynchronous Transfer Mode?
You: No, they connect their iPad to an Automated Teller Machine and use its network over a VPN
New guy: They can get a Virtual Private Network over an ATM?
You: No, a Very Profitable Network. It's an ATM after all.
New guy: I quit.
Re: (Score:2)
It does matter, because one of the things that a union does besides striking is suing. Yeah, if they're going to outsource to India, that's different, but if they're bringing in H1B like we've been talking about, that's illegal, and the union can and will sue their asses off. That's one of the things that unions are about.
Re: (Score:2)
How illegal is it?
Seriously. Is it civil law illegal or criminal law illegal and is there even penalties for replacement of American workers with H1B workers?
We are told it is illegal. But this isn't the first time an elected official has publicly stood against this behavior. You would think that the US government itself would have an interest in it's laws being followed. The president even has a constitutional requirement to faithfully execute the laws of the land. So why does it take a non existent union
they ALREADY didn't have to train the replacements (Score:2)
Intentional inaction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The Great Equalization Begins (Score:4, Insightful)
While I'm desperately trying to remain as productive as at least 6 Indian employees so I don't get off-shored, I have to admit I'm left with the awkward question "Do I deserve to be part of the 1% (household income $48K) solely on the basis of hereditary privilege?"
I have a feeling we're entering the era of the "Great Equalization". And I have to say, that it absolutely sucks for those who, as part of the developed world, were automatically part of the elite. And if its bad for me, it's going to be terrible for my children.
I just wish I had better moral claim than "I was born rich, so I deserve to remain rich."
Re:The Great Equalization Begins (Score:4, Insightful)
Beyond pay, this also veers toward indentured servitude type stuff going on. Once here, the employer holds an unreasonable amount of power (firing means deportation). This is a very dangerous trend.
Not to say H1-B is always abused, I know some brilliant H1-B folks (company got H1-B to specifically get those people by name, and I get the impression they are paid a premium as well). But the trend of do some labor gymnastics to replace local with H1-B systematically... that's a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't have to justify your higher salary based on your nationality (or apparently feel horrifically guilty about your "hereditary privilege". Christ, the PC crowd has really gotten to you). These corporations enjoy the privilege of being located in the US, a safe and prosperous democratic republic. As such, there is some inherent overhead in the form of higher taxes and wages because, to put it simply, they're located on prime real estate. There are all sorts of accounting tricks to help with th
Re: (Score:3)
It's not hard to understand the proper fix..
So, what's the proper fix ?
Re: (Score:2)
We need to make sure users of the H1B program can't skirt the intent of the law, which they're absolutely doing right now by outsourcing to specialist contractors who hire nothing but H1Bs. They're simply using this program to drive down IT wages, rather than using it as a mechanism to bring in labor for jobs that can't be filled domestically. That loophole needs to be closed, and more importantly, enforced.
Of course, understanding the fix at a conceptual level is easy, but as with many things in life, ac
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a way of looking at it. But generally speaking, as a nation, we don't let markets do whatever they wish, right? Because in many cases, markets don't do what's humane or just for the population at large, and especially not for individuals. For instance, market forces don't care about whether a company pollutes the environment, or whether a person is injured or defrauded, so we pass laws to protect consumers related to safety, fraud, and many other fectors. Markets may dictate that someone is worth
Re: (Score:2)
When it gets down to it — talking trade balances here — once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here — once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel — once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity — y'know what? There's only four things we do better than anyone else:
music
movies
microcode (software)
high-speed pizza delivery
Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash
Re: (Score:2)
That is an awkward question, only because it's the wrong one to be asking.
Do you deserve to be part of the 1%? If you believe so, then yes you do.
"You don't get paid what you're worth, but rather what you hustle."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it were only a national issue, there wouldn't be an international source of lower waged workers. The mere fact that this is available makes it a global issue.
Unfortunately, the Trump solution of isolationist trade and immigration policy has been tried more than once in the past, always with disastrous results. But when we don't know what does work, humans always resort to the solution experience has proven will fail, because hey, at least it's a "solution".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Change the law (Score:5, Insightful)
Angry letters will change nothing. The senator (lawmaker) simply needs to do their job. You wouldn't even need to end the H-1B program. I think the problem is more the way it is designed to enable slave labor and thus drive the cost of employment down. If H-1B applicants would have more rights, they could demand higher wages. Instead they are kept as slaves that will not only lose their job but also get deported. Making their legal position similar to those that have an illegal immigration status. H-1B simply legalizes illegal immigration for the employer. If H-1Bs had more power, they could and would demand higher wages. How about unionized H-1Bs? Freedom to stay in the US for a guaranteed period of time. And to top it off: Training obligations for the company that requests them.
Or you can simply abandon the H-1B outright.
Btw: Trump loves himself more than anything else. And as a builder he profits from illegal immigrants. Thus he won't do anything about illegal immigration. Simple as that. He has proven that he lies all the time. So we can disregard what comes out of his mouth. Thus we have to look at policies that are likely. And for someone who makes a *lot* of profit from illegal immigrants it would be downright stupid to prevent that from happening. Is Trump stupid?
Should this be illegal? (Score:2)
I am wondering whether it should be illegal to require an 'about to be laid off employee' to train their replacements. IMHO, the requirement should be limited to employees who are resigning of their own accord.
Re: (Score:2)
"I am wondering whether it should be illegal to require an 'about to be laid off employee' to train their replacements."
Why not? If you are holding a given position is perfectly within requirements to be able to demonstrate your knowledge about it. See, no one is asking for or expecting professional-grade training, but just fulfilling your job. You still get your paycheck by the end of the week so since the company is still fulfilling its part of the agreement, why shouldn't you fulfill yours?
If you don't
Re: Should this be illegal? (Score:2)
Why should it be illegal? I would have no trouble training my replacement as long as I'm getting a paycheck. I would be looking for another job the whole time unless they promised me a severance package that made it worth staying around and having an employment gap.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From Dec 2015 debates,
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11... [nytimes.com]
Cavuto: Mr. Trump, as the leading presidential candidate on this stage and one whose tax plan exempts couples making up to $50,000 a year from paying any federal income taxes at all, are you sympathetic to the protesters cause since a $15 wage works out to about $31,000 a year?
TRUMP: I can’t be Neil. And the and the reason I can’t be is that we are a country that is being beaten on every front economically, militarily. There is nothing that we do now to win. We don’t win anymore. Our taxes are too high. I’ve come up with a tax plan that many, many people like very much. It’s going to be a tremendous plan. I think it’ll make our country and our economy very dynamic.
But, taxes too high, wages too high, we’re not going to be able to compete against the world. I hate to say it, but we have to leave it the way it is.
After being reamed for it, he change his mind, but there is no reason to believe he would not change it . He is just running his mouth and will saying anything that will get him elected to president. Who knows what this guy would actually do if he were elected.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely. Seems like a simple, easy solution. It's a win for the guys who otherwise have to queue up for years for H1B, and it's a win for the guys that dont want to compete for jobs with people paid three times less than them.
Makes perfect sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Makes perfect sense...
"You're not skilled enough to do this job, so we need you to train this H-1B guy we hired to replace you at half the cost."
Wipro (Score:3)
Is a layoff for an IT worker just inconvenient? (Score:3)
If these "IT Workers" are software developers, dev ops, or network admins with marketable skills, and are either in a decent metro area or are willing to move, is a layoff any more than a slight inconvenience?
In 2011, I worked for a small software company (around 30 people) and we all knew that the end was coming and that we would all lose our jobs. Management was very open about our condition. Most of the survivors stuck around in hopes that our options would be worth something (they weren't) or that we would at least get severance package (we all got a month).
Within one month, every developer had another job, all more than likely paying more than we were making.
In 2014, I was in a department with 14 developers and we all saw the way the department was heading. All of the developers found another job within six months. The only reason some stuck around was because they were close to the 3 year vesting period. But all could have found something sooner.
Re: Training Replacements = confession (Score:5, Insightful)
Your political system makes it pretty much a requirement for a politician if he wants to compete on a national level that he takes bribes. Either that or he is himself SO rich that the political "career" is more akin to a hobby for him 'cause a rich boy needs some rich boy's toys.
You need money to run for an office. LOTS of it. And the only sensible way to get it is to beg for it from corporations. Who in turn are certainly not going to do this out of the good of their hearts. So what do you expect?
Personally I prefer our system. Here, if you manage to get a modest sum of votes you get your campaigning costs back from tax money. Yes, that costs my money. True.
But at least that way I buy the crook.
Re: (Score:2)
The company cuts back jobs, and doesn't really 'hire' anyone. Instead they find a good old outsourcing firm to provide contract work cheaper than the people they laid off. At this point in the transaction, it's just good ol' American capitalist competition at work.
Now turn to the outsourcing company. They just landed a huge contract. But they don't have the manpower, so they need to hire new. They haven't laid anyone off. Now *they* can claim lack of available talent to apply for H1-Bs, and not have a
Re: (Score:2)
Loopholes make it hard to hold violators accountable?
Certainly. But oh look who has been totally randomly been chosen for a through IRS audit this year. And next. And the year after. And oddly as long as he keeps using loopholes.
Coincidence. Pure coincidence, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US needs to improve employee protection (Score:5, Insightful)
Treating workers like this would be illegal in more developed countries. Why do Americans stand for this kind of treatment?
The American Dream.
Americans dream that they will become the rich company owner who gets to reap the benefits of hiring cheap and selling dear, so they can live in a mansion and play golf all day. And if not them, their children. Or grandchildren. You just have to vote for the right conservative that keeps that dream possible. And pray to a supernatural being so he'll subtly treat you and yours better than others, so it comes true for you and yours at the expense of others.
TL;DR: Utter stupidity