 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / November 2003Post for U.S. readers: What companies are outsourcing calls to India?
There have been a couple of very interesting stories on U.S. TV news shows about how somewhat quietly, more and more companies are outsourcing their customer service calls directly to call centers in India. The reason being that it's about 1/4th the cost to pay them as opposed to skilled American workers. Numbers varied a bit per report, but it is estimated that so far tens of thousands of white collar American jobs have been lost as service/tech reps have been laid off to be replaced by the Indian call centers. Dell Computers is bad about this. Even in mid-day hours, you will get transferred to India, and must endure people who seem to have never spoken English at all as their accents are so bad you cannot make out a thing they are saying. Smaller companies such as Netgear and Linksys are also doing this. During one story, when a reporter asked the C.E.O. about what he thought regarding all of the complaints U.S. callers were making about this, his reply was, "Oh well". I'm curious as to whether anyone has come across a site that actually maintains a list of U.S. companies that are outsourcing their calls like this? If not, I'm considering making a list of my own and posting it on my site. The fact that so many jobs are lost while C.E.O.s are making tens of millions of dollars in yearly salaries (literally) is disturbing. What's moreso, is that these companies think so little about their customers that they think it's ok to subject a caller to someone who speaks broken English at best, and in an accent so heavy one must ask, "what? what?? WHAT???" , in order to understand what is being said to them. A list would help potential buyers decide if they wish to give that particular company their money or not. Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that do this? Thanks >Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that >do this? Amazon: some calls go to India Circuit City: every call goes to India (check out the photo on their homepage, they don't try to hide it at all) (and naturally, some reverse-racist twit will call you a racist, even as more and more jobs go to India. Computer programmers, of course, are hit very hard. Maybe the proliferation of crash-prone software, like AOL's, is due to Indian programmers doing the lion's shate of the work.) They can call me what they will. I have no problem talking to someone who was born in another country on a tech call that originates HERE. There are two things I think SHOULD be going on... 1) Buy it in the U.S. from a U.S. company, then if you call for customer service or tech assistance, the call should be received by a U.S. call center which employs U.S. citizens, or, those working in the U.S. on a valid Visa or work permit. 2) I could care less if anyone was born in another country or not, however, you are an idiot for applying for a job here, if you cannot speak English clearly. Moreso, the company that hires you is a bigger idiot. Where the person who answers the phone is from originally is not a concern to me. What is, is that the jobs for service support are kept HERE, and that the people answering the phones can be clearly understood by the caller. If a company does not meet these two simple things, then I'm going to start seeking out those who do to give my money to, even if it's an inconvenience for me. Greg > >Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that > >do this? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > very hard. Maybe the proliferation of crash-prone software, like AOL's, is > due to Indian programmers doing the lion's shate of the work.) > They can call me what they will. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Greg As far as I can tell, for most services it's now required to have spanish-language services along side english-language ones (correct me if I'm wrong, I've been in the US for just under 2 years now .. still learning). Based on that I think it's a perfectly just point to want the english-language service to actually speak good English. I won't comment on foreigners taking American jobs for obvious reasons, but I do believe that in jobs such as this, where communication skills are almost as important as the answers you're giving, such out-sourcing does seem to be disasterous. It draws a curious comparison to Work Visas .. they'll only give you a visa to fill an American job if there's a shortage of citizens / residents able to fill the position. In some places it's dairy staff, in others it's nurses .. but nowhere would it be acceptable to lay off citizens / residents to create the positions. In the age of our so-called "Global Village", I can't help but wonder if this is a law that needs to catch up. a 2 cent ramble, Shaun <Snip> > In the age of our so-called "Global Village", I can't help but wonder if > this is a law that needs to catch up. Why ? Let the CUSTOMER decide, if they don't like the practice don't shop there, or buy their product. For <insert deity of choice> sake, don't let the Government interfer, all they will do is screw it up ! As an asdie, it seems odd to moi that the proponents captalism are now advocating socalism when it suits them ? Same thing with the overly protected US Ag industries, seems like a waste of dollars to prop them up, they either get efficent (they have the home town advantage !) or go under....  SignatureTrevor S "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein >Why ? Let the CUSTOMER decide, if they don't like the practice don't shop >there, or buy their product. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >they either get efficent (they have the home town advantage !) or go >under.... Ag subsidies as it relates to foreign competition is a complicated situation as a country needs or should be able to ultimately feed itself, especially in times of crisis. One could argue it is a strategic and security issue for a country to be able to sustain a certain level of food production for its citizens. The same thing goes for certain critical industries like steel and others. I don't think it is just a simple matter of allowing free trade for every industry. You can never have totally free trade in all industries as security issues will always come up for ceratin goods and services. for7b@aol.com <snip> > Ag subsidies as it relates to foreign competition is a complicated > situation as a country needs or should be able to ultimately feed [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You can never have totally free trade in all industries as security > issues will always come up for ceratin goods and services. Which is often the justification used by unvaible industries and way to simplistic. A few problmes with that philisophy: You are propping them up why do you give some business a break and not others, hows that fair to business you do not give large subsidies to ? The customer has to pay extra to get food produced ineffeciently. How will they become more efficent if you let them wallow like fat sows in the mud ? Let them compete on an even field, they have a home field advantage ! That should be enough, of an advantage Tax subsidised grain exports go up against other countries non supported product and allegedly "compete" in the world market. What competiton, you're paying them to produce ineffeciently, do other countries then slap tarrifs on imports on your food making the problem even worse ? All that happens is retalitation and an ever increasing cycle akin to an escalating Cold War GW is pushing the Eu into this very Trade War as we speaki know who suffers, you... You get to pay higher prices for food, for imported goods that get slapped with an extar atrrif etc Genuinely Free Trade will sort the Wheat from the Chaff (no pun intended), there will be some short term pain, and a strong productive business will emerge out the other side. It is as simple as letting it become free trade, let the customer decide if they want US Beef or Brazilian Beef, not the Government of each country. SignatureTrevor S "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein Trevor S responds: >Which is often the justification used by unvaible industries and way to >simplistic. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >You are propping them up why do you give some business a break and not >others, hows that fair to business you do not give large subsidies to ? This is a bullshit answer. Should we give subsidies to chair makers instead of farmers? Subsidies aren't the best deal around, but chairmakers aren't going to force people into starvation if they fail. >The customer has to pay extra to get food produced ineffeciently. How >will they become more efficent if you let them wallow like fat sows in >the mud ? Let them compete on an even field, they have a home field >advantage ! That should be enough, of an advantage What even field? Many Asian and European governments provide subsidies for exports. If you think a Chinese farmer is more efficient at farming than an American or Canadian or European farmer, then you know almost nothing about farming. >Tax subsidised grain exports go up against other countries non supported >product and allegedly "compete" in the world market. Damned few other countries don't subsidize their food, grain or other, exports in some manner. The basic problem in the U.S. has been overproduction of grains, so in order to get rid of surplus stocks, subsidies are used. Many Russians, among others, would have starved over the past few decades without that help from the U.S. >It is as simple as letting it become free trade, let the customer decide >if they want US Beef or Brazilian Beef, not the Government of each >country. Be nice if all agreed. Until all agree, there's not any way out. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson <snip> > This is a bullshit answer. No, the answer is fine, you have just not thought it through... <snip> > What even field? Many Asian and European governments provide subsidies > for exports. If you think a Chinese farmer is more efficient at > farming than an American or Canadian or European farmer, then you know > almost nothing about farming. sigh.... I guess no debating someone who is not even on the same planet. Why do they subsidise ? > Damned few other countries don't subsidize their food, grain or other, > exports in some manner. That reply is asanine. Just because the other lemmmings jump off a cliff does not mean you have to, an example is Australia doesn't (mostly). > The basic problem in the U.S. has been > overproduction of grains, so in order to get rid of surplus stocks, > subsidies are used. COUGH ! They overproduce BECAUSE they get subsidies, you have the cart before the horse. > Many Russians, among others, would have starved > over the past few decades without that help from the U.S. I guess the only answer to that is, what a crock of sh.t. <snip> SignatureTrevor S "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein Trevor goes on, again: ><snip> > >> This is a bullshit answer. > >No, the answer is fine, you have just not thought it through... Dear me. One of us hasn't thought, that's for sure. >> What even field? Many Asian and European governments provide subsidies >> for exports. If you think a Chinese farmer is more efficient at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >sigh.... I guess no debating someone who is not even on the same planet. >Why do they subsidise ? I really don't know why Europeans subsidize their industries, from farming to yo-yo manufacturing. I don't pay that much attention to subsidies in the U.S. any more, but farming subsidies. I assume they subsidize to give farmers price supports, but I don't KNOW. Obviously, you do. Or think you do. A fact or two would be nice, just to fill the space. >That reply is asanine. Just because the other lemmmings jump off a cliff >does not mean you have to, an example is Australia doesn't (mostly). Mostly. Now that reply isn't asinine, it's moronic. >COUGH ! They overproduce BECAUSE they get subsidies, you have the cart >before the horse. Your statement. Provide a fact. Any fact, but one related to overproducing. There are numerous reasons for over-production of various crops. Subsidies appear to be one. There are others, many of them tied to nature. >> Many Russians, among others, would have starved >> over the past few decades without that help from the U.S. > >I guess the only answer to that is, what a crock of sh.t. "Russia Importing Grain. Roskhleboprodukt, Russia's grain-trading firm, has bought 1.5 million tons of grain from the United States, Austria, and Hungary, the office of First Deputy Agriculture Minister Vladimir Shcherbak said yesterday. Talk of Russian grain purchases against a backdrop of dwindled world stocks was among factors that drove Chicago wheat futures prices up above $5 per bushel in recent days and toward 16-year highs. Purchases of 1.5 million tons would be worth around $300 million. (3)" That was in '95. Supposedly, most of the grain was bought to feed livestock, but given Russia's situation today, I wonder at least a little. This has been going on since the early '70s, at least. There are quotes all over the place waiting to be copied. You can look them up if you'd rather be constructive than noisy, which I must admit I doubt. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson >As far as I can tell, for most services it's now required to have >spanish-language services along side english-language ones (correct me if >I'm wrong, I've been in the US for just under 2 years now .. still >learning). Nope, that is wrong. If any company provides alternative languages for their customers it is simply because they are catering to them. There are no foreign language requirements for businesses. I doubt there are any for government either. Frankly there is too much catering to other languages as it is making lazy immigrants that much less likely to learn english within a reasonable amount of time as they should. > Based on that I think it's a perfectly just point to want the >english-language service to actually speak good English. I won't comment >on foreigners taking American jobs for obvious reasons, but I do believe >that in jobs such as this, where communication skills are almost as >important as the answers you're giving, such out-sourcing does seem to be >disasterous. > Shaun I've already been through that twice. I think they were both from India too. I could barely understand them. They had to constantly repeat themselves after I kept telling them that I had no idea what they had just said. I couldn't imagine them lasting for too long. for7b@aol.com for7b responds: >Nope, that is wrong. If any company provides alternative languages for their >customers it is simply because they are catering to them. There are no [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >lazy immigrants that much less likely to learn english within a reasonable >amount of time as they should. My liberal views are nearly identical to yours. As a case in point, I don't recall anyone stumping to provide Italian translators during the '30s, '40s, '50s when the influx from Italia was huge. They learned to speak the language,g ot teased umercifully for their accents, and became solid, valuable citizens almost immediately. The same was true of the importation of Chinese in huge numbers during the '70s, '80s, '90s, for building railroads. Yeah, the 18--s. But Spanish is becoming a need in business in the U.S. today, and it is not because of huge markets OUTSIDE our borders. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson > Frankly there is too much catering to other languages as it is > making lazy immigrants that much less likely to learn english > within a reasonable amount of time as they should. Poorly-educated immigrants (*) typically live in their ethnic communities (where they can find SOME level of protection) and people like FOR7b wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. So, why the hell SHOULD they learn English, when it is hard for them to even be proficient in their own language? Just because people like FOR7b are sadistic a**holes and they'd like to burden them with yet another survival problem? And NO, there are NO lazy immigrants, the simple thought of that is highly offensive: people come into this country to WORK and they DO work their a.ses off, typically doing sh.t racists like FOR7b would consider too labor-intensive. The myth that they are all after our welfare system is just another racist lie. They work and they pay taxes, and they have no representation at all (isn't it ironic? This is the country that started of a revolution because people paid taxes and had no political representation...) Talk about a double standard!!! I believe they have every right to expect cooperation from the government they pay taxes to. Fortunately, not all politicians in this country are hatemongers like FOR7b, especially in more progressive states. And if one day the US becomes a bilingual country (like Canada), so be it, all the better. I have studied Spanish (among others...) and it's a beautiful language. I suggest more Americans do so. I'd be more than glad to use it in my daily life, besides English. As a matter of fact, if you live in South Fla. or So.Cal, chances are that if you can speak Spanish, you already have PLENTY of extra opportunities. FOR7b has publicly declared on this NG that he wishes the US would go back to the pre-FDR era, when immigrants were rounded up at Ellis Island and treated like cattle. It's really no surprise he hates them. BTW, there are plenty of immigrants in the US who speak little or no English at all. They all do fine, thanks to legislation passed with the help from progressive politicians, who understand that immigration actually makes our strength. Some even manage to become wealthy. FOR7b doesn't even know the REALITY of his country (typical right-wing, he MAKES IT UP...), outside his small circle of intolerance. I guess he can't sleep at night, with the frightening thought that every year in this country there are more and more Latinos and less and less rednecks like him. Diversity is what makes this country worth living in, not intolerance. (*) When immigrants come to this country with a decent education, chances are that they know English very well. This is confirmed by countless studies. So, the problem only regards people who were not so fortunate. They should be helped, not treated as if they were animals. not to ignore the bitusa[1] who can't speak English :-) 1 bitusa =bored in the u s a > >Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that > >do this? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > very hard. Maybe the proliferation of crash-prone software, like AOL's, is > due to Indian programmers doing the lion's shate of the work.) Earthlink: most phone support calls are now routed to India. HPQ: phone and online messaging support for some products now routed to India. Rick Hi, Here are a few: Dell Gateway AOL Rosita > Earthlink: most phone support calls are now routed to India. > > HPQ: phone and online messaging support for some products > now routed to India. > > Rick Incorrect. EarthLink support calls, either CS or TS, are handled in the US, in several centers around the country. RitzCamera.com Dell > >Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that > >do this? > Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that > do this? AT&T outsources to Canada. If you ask them where they are when you are on the phone, they will say "North of Seattle" which really means Victoria, BC, Canada. This goes both ways, Canada has lost more jobs to the US, than the US has to Canada, but it is the US that is always complaining and imposing tariffs, even though there is supposed to be free trade. Maybe it is time for american wages to come down. R > > Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that > > do this? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Maybe it is time for american wages to come down. Or Canadian wages to go up : ) >Or Canadian wages to go up : ) They have. The Canadian dollar has risen from a low of about 62 cents US to about 75 cents now. From the point of view of anyone buying Canadian exports, or outsourcing to Canada, that's exactly equivalent to about a 20% wage increase. Dave >>Any lists already out there? If not, what companies are you aware of that >>do this? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > R Dell now outsources customer support to India. DUMB IDEA! Their customer service grade in the magazines has already tumbled down to about what other companies offer. Sad. Isn't that one way to redistribute wealth to poorer countries? Why can't the US companies compete on equal footing with foreing ones without crying foul? I'm sure you ALWAYS buy american made products, since this is a digital camera newsgroup, just look where you mew camera comes from! or be coherent with all your views and buy a Kodak, they need your help more than ever. Jean > There have been a couple of very interesting stories on U.S. TV news shows > about how somewhat quietly, more and more companies are outsourcing their [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Thanks Jean cries: >I'm sure you ALWAYS buy american made products, since this is a digital >camera newsgroup, just look where you mew camera comes from! or be coherent >with all your views and buy a Kodak, they need your help more than ever. Not exactly sure you're someone to be giving lessons on coherence. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson Why is that? Jean > Jean cries: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." > Thomas J. Watson >Isn't that one way to redistribute wealth to poorer countries? > >Why can't the US companies compete on equal footing with foreing ones >without crying foul? That's funny coming from a European source. >I'm sure you ALWAYS buy american made products, since this is a digital >camera newsgroup, just look where you mew camera comes from! or be coherent >with all your views and buy a Kodak, they need your help more than ever. > >Jean for7b@aol.com Do not assume from my name I come from europe. I am from Canada and I have seen so many times the US cry foul when they get beaten at their own game. Since they are the bigger economic power, they impose tariff barriers IN SPITE of something they agreed to which is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The US even petitioned Canada on imported (to the US) tomatoes! As if we never bought lettuce and oranges from florida in winter. Jean > >Isn't that one way to redistribute wealth to poorer countries? > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > for7b@aol.com >Do not assume from my name I come from europe. I am from Canada and I have >seen so many times the US cry foul when they get beaten at their own game. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Jean Your source in your previous post had an Italian connection. Now it is different I see. Maybe next time it will be different once again. Who knows. All countries eventually "cry foul" when it comes to protecting certain markets. Try to keep that in mind before highlighting only what America does. It'll make you look more objective too. for7b@aol.com > >Do not assume from my name I come from europe. I am from Canada and I have > >seen so many times the US cry foul when they get beaten at their own game. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Your source in your previous post had an Italian connection. Now it is > different I see. Maybe next time it will be different once again. Who knows. THAT's news to me ;-) > All countries eventually "cry foul" when it comes to protecting certain > markets. Try to keep that in mind before highlighting only what America does. > It'll make you look more objective too. The OP was not objective either, he wanted to boycot companies outsourcing their help lines to foreign countries. I merely pointed out the incongruity of his plea. However big the US economy is, they can't have it all. Others have a right to live too. Jean jean states: >The OP was not objective either, he wanted to boycot companies outsourcing >their help lines to foreign countries. I merely pointed out the incongruity >of his plea. However big the US economy is, they can't have it all. Others >have a right to live too. It would really be nice, though, if these other countries created their own jobs, instead of grabbing of jobs created by U.S. companies to service U.S. customers. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson > jean states: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." > Thomas J. Watson The wonders of free market. Amm, how about the US not allow other contries to sell cheaper to the US. What if those countries not sell cheaper to the rest of the world were the US has markets ? How about the US return all talented people that have migrated to america for a better life ?! At the end of the day, the US needs to compete in a global market. In this global market if the US wants to protect it self, then the Americans will get pissed off for paying too much when the Europeans are not. Would you pay 10% for your digital cameras, how about 200% !? Just to protect American intrest. I will have you know that most Italian "Made in Italy" exclusive lables are still made in China. It's a scam. You either remain competetive or it will catch up to you, and when it does the collapse will destroy a large part of the economy. Oh ... in a battle of competition, I doubt you (and we as in Australia) can stay ahead for too long. In contries of a billion or more (read China and India) they will soon be producing talent in the tens of millions and their quality will go up faster than the cost of living. Who will hurt first ... A country that is used to high wages, but we will all get our turn G How about Giorgis responds: >Amm, how about the US not allow other contries to sell cheaper to the US. > >What if those countries not sell cheaper to the rest of the world were >the US has markets ? Huh? WTF does this have to do with exporting jobs? You suggest the U.S. regulate prices from companies located in other countries. Sure. Tell the Chinese not to sell to us at low prices. You tell 'em. Market competition sets the prices, as does the market competition that draws jobs out of the U.S., regardless of the area to which jobs are drawn. >How about the US return all talented people that have migrated to >america for a better life ?! This makes about as much sense as your first statements. Return them to where? Places they voluntarily left? What about me? Some of my ancestors came to this continent over 350 years ago.Others were waiting here to lift their hair. >At the end of the day, the US needs to compete in a global market. In >this global market if the US wants to protect it self, then the >Americans will get pissed off for paying too much when the Europeans are >not. Would you pay 10% for your digital cameras, how about 200% !? Just >to protect American intrest. How would paying more for digital cameras protect ANY American interests. AFAIK, none are manufactured here. >I will have you know that most Italian "Made in Italy" exclusive lables >are still made in China. It's a scam. So? >Oh ... in a battle of competition, I doubt you (and we as in Australia) >can stay ahead for too long. In contries of a billion or more (read >China and India) they will soon be producing talent in the tens of >millions and their quality will go up faster than the cost of living. Up to a point. It might be well to remember that this ball of dirt has limited resources. Living standards around the world will improve, but only to the point when a wider array of resources becomes truly scarce, at which time living conditions around the world are going downhill, fast because all the yuppie-mobiles and huge houses that can be built have already been built. >Who will hurt first ... A country that is used to high wages, but we >will all get our turn At what? Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson Remember the OP was bitching about AMERICAN companies outsourcing TO foreign countries. The foreign countries bidded their services on a free market and the AMERICANS lost because they charged too much. They did create their own jobs and won the contract fair and sqare. They charge less because their people get paid less in the same way a house built in San Fransisco is more expensive than one built in a small town in Maine. If it would be cost effective to build a house in the middle of nowhere and move it to a prime location would the bilder in prime locations ask for a boycot because of unfair practices? We live in a world market, like it or not. Jean > jean states: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." > Thomas J. Watson Jean writes: >Remember the OP was bitching about AMERICAN companies outsourcing TO foreign >countries. The foreign countries bidded their services on a free market and >the AMERICANS lost because they charged too much. They did create their own >jobs and won the contract fair and sqare. Bullshit, to be polite. The jobs being discussed are primarily help line jobs for products used in the U.S. Given the fact that most of the help provided by companies today is inane, it probably doesn't matter one helluva whole lot that the people who try, and fail, to answer questions don't speak understandable English to any ears other than their own. If we were speaking of manufacturing jobs, you'd have a case. Help line jobs don't pay that well in the States, so I can just imagine what the set-up and wages must be in India or Malaysia. And I don't recall asking for a boycott of anything. Nor do I object to living in a world market, though I do object to bullshit reasoning like yours. Charlie Self "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas J. Watson You want quality, you pay for it, you want low prices, you get what you pay for! Jean > Jean writes: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." > Thomas J. Watson >Remember the OP was bitching about AMERICAN companies outsourcing TO foreign >countries. The foreign countries bidded their services on a free market and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >We live in a world market, like it or not. Regardless of one's opinions about international economics, hiring people who can not communicate with the intended market for a communication-oriented tech support job is nothing more than sabotage of customer support. The CEOs will reward themselves hansomely for their decision. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>Remember the OP was bitching about AMERICAN companies outsourcing TO foreign >>countries. The foreign countries bidded their services on a free market and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > customer support. The CEOs will reward themselves hansomely for their > decision. Yep, such is the idea of business logic these days. >It would really be nice, though, if these other countries created their own >jobs, instead of grabbing of jobs created by U.S. companies to service U.S. >customers. I have a better idea; why not outsource CEO positions to poorer countries with salaries of about $200k/yr, which is really more than most CEOs who get 20, 50 or $100M/yr in total compensation as they run the companies into the ground, are really worth. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > I have a better idea; why not outsource CEO positions to poorer > countries with salaries of about $200k/yr, which is really more than > most CEOs who get 20, 50 or $100M/yr in total compensation as they run > the companies into the ground, are really worth. You are blilliant! Bravo! That is an excellent idea. Jean > I have a better idea; why not outsource CEO positions to poorer > countries with salaries of about $200k/yr, which is really more than > most CEOs who get 20, 50 or $100M/yr in total compensation as they run > the companies into the ground, are really worth. Love the idea. Unfortunately the corporate world OWNS this country and the CEO's have no intention of giving up their absurd privileges. So much for the "efficiency" and "cost-effectiveness" of the private sector... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.