Corporate America Doesn't Learn

[HoughMade]

Don't we think that specific jobs that could be effectively outsources...have been?

Not every office job would could be done for less money overseas. In fact, only specific jobs can be...and they are.

 

[wtburnette]

Don't we think that specific jobs that could be effectively outsources...have been?

Not every office job would could be done for less money overseas. In fact, only specific jobs can be...and they are.

I'm sure they'll figure out more that can go, eventually. I also hope some companies get a clue as to how bad some of these outsourced positions can be. If you're not getting quality productivity, are you really saving money sending those jobs elsewhere?

 

[Twangbanger]

It really doesn't matter how simple a point is, if it is wrong. Do you really think a company said to itself: "Gee, my employees are more productive when working from home and I have lower overhead so I think I'll outsource their jobs to India"? Any company that believes that remote Chinese or Indian workers can do the job well enough, already went that route or was already heading that direction. If/when outsourcing equals a net benefit it'll likely be done regardless but reducing overhead and increasing productivity by working from home makes outsourcing less likely not more so.

Two fallacies I'm detecting:

1) Nobody is saying this concept is "new;" only that a lot of companies weren't looking at it before - and now they are.

2) When you say "outsourcing" at least 2 of you (Matlock and 270) are automatically jumping to the conclusion that means "Overseas." And it doesn't mean that.

I think you guys are kinda talking around the point, but missing each other. I think we all understand the "laws of business." Jobs that can be outsourced, will eventually be outsourced. And nobody claimed artificially moving back to the office will stop that; that is a red-herring. Once the genie is out of the bottle, and management pries their eyes open, there is no going back. I think we agree that increasing efficiency _should_ make outsourcing less likely, if everyone is perceiving the situation clearly.

...but there's the problem.

What is being argued here, is that a lot of managers *DID NOT* have their eyes open the past two decades. Companies and individual managers were _opposed_ to the concept of remote work in the past. They didn't like the idea. (WTB, your entire thread is based on this premise, so you of all people should get that). They really had no opportunity to observe how much of the actual work could be done remotely, because they couldn't take the blinders off and get past their natural, knee-jerk reaction of opposing it. Some old-school farts just plain like to see butts in seats, because that's how they lived their lives so far. They were operating within the idea-constraint that office work was the only valid option that could serve their customer effectively and prevent people from slacking off - *THEREFORE* - their eyes could not see any possibility outside of that constraint.

Is that bad management? Yes, probably. But "bad management" is not illegal. It's actually quite common. A philosophical objection to bad management, doesn't make it not exist.

The point is not logically arguable: a lot, and I mean a WHOLE lot, of companies and managers got their myopic, mediocrity-tinted eyes forcibly opened to the possibilities of remote work by having it forced down their throats in the COVID Plandemic. And now that their eyes are finally open, there is going to be a change in attitude. The fact that this change in attitude *COULD HAVE* or *SHOULD HAVE* already happened before, is irrelevant.

Management was previously operating within a perceived constraint that WFH was not allowable, and they would lose market share to competitors because their service level would somehow degrade if they tried it.

That artificial perceived constraint has now been stripped away and proven wrong. And companies are seeing potential they did not see before. It's not that the potential didn't exist. Of course it existed. It's just that mediocre management didn't recognize it. And whether you want to accept it or not - perception is (was) reality.

INGOMike is correct - once the blinders are stripped away, clueless management is going to:

1) See possibilities they didn't _think_ were possible before, and
2) Begin wondering what _else_ they weren't seeing before, and start searching and exploring for that.

I'm just telling you, with my own company as Exhibit A, that those other options don't have to be "China" or "India." It can be Mississippi, or Puerto Rico, or Virgin Islands. That's what happens when companies have their eyes opened. They start looking for options, and getting creative.

Nobody is saying that WTBurnette going back into the office will stop that. I'm just saying...enjoy your situation now, because certain aspects of it, like most things in life, may not be permanent.

 

[Ingomike]

It really doesn't matter how simple a point is, if it is wrong. Do you really think a company said to itself: "Gee, my employees are more productive when working from home and I have lower overhead so I think I'll outsource their jobs to India"? Any company that believes that remote Chinese or Indian workers can do the job well enough, already went that route or was already heading that direction. If/when outsourcing equals a net benefit it'll likely be done regardless but reducing overhead and increasing productivity by working from home makes outsourcing less likely not more so.

You guys crack me up, this absolutism and literalism is a hoot. My last post on this.

Do you realize you just said it is impossible, the guy pushing impossible, usually is losing the debate.. LOL

 

[Ingomike]

I think you guys are kinda talking around the point, but missing each other. I think we all understand the "laws of business." Jobs that can be outsourced, will eventually be outsourced. And nobody claimed artificially moving back to the office will stop that; that is a red-herring. Once the genie is out of the bottle, and management pries their eyes open, there is no going back. I think we agree that increasing efficiency _should_ make outsourcing less likely, if everyone is perceiving the situation clearly.

...but there's the problem.

What is being advanced here, is that a lot of managers *DID NOT* have their eyes open the past two decades. Companies and individual managers were _opposed_ to the concept of remote work in the past. They didn't like the idea. They really had no opportunity to observe how much of the actual work could be done remotely, because they couldn't take the blinders off and get past their natural, knee-jerk reaction of opposing it. Some old-school farts just plain like to see butts in seats, because that's how they lived their lives so far.

Is that bad management? Yes, probably. But "bad management" is not illegal. It's actually quite common. A philosophical objection to bad management, doesn't make it not exist.

The point is not logically arguable: a lot, and I mean a WHOLE lot, of companies and managers got their myopic, mediocrity-tinted eyes forcibly opened to the possibilities of remote work by having it forced down their throats in the COVID Plandemic. And now that their eyes are finally open, there is going to be a change in attitude. The fact that this change in attitude *COULD HAVE* or *SHOULD HAVE* already happened before, is irrelevant.

Management was previously operating within a perceived constraint that WFH was not allowable, and they would lose market share to competitors because their service level would somehow degrade if they tried it.

That artificial perceived constraint has now been stripped away and proven wrong. And companies are seeing potential they did not see before. It's not that the potential didn't exist. Of course it existed. It's just that mediocre management didn't recognize it. And whether you want to accept it or not - perception is (was) reality.

INGOMike is correct - once the blinders are stripped away, clueless management is going to:

1) See possibilities they didn't _think_ were possible before, and
2) Begin wondering what _else_ they weren't seeing before, and start searching and exploring for that.

I'm just telling you, with my own company as Exhibit A, that those other options don't have to be "China" or "India." It can be Mississippi, or Puerto Rico, or Virgin Islands. That's what happens when companies have their eyes opened. They start looking for options, and getting creative.

Nobody is saying that WTBurnette going back into the office will stop that. I'm just saying...enjoy your situation now, because certain aspects of it, like most things in life, may not be permanent.

Great articulation, way better than my explanations! Bravo!

 

[two70]

You guys crack me up, this absolutism and literalism is a hoot. My last post on this.

Do you realize you just said it is impossible, the guy pushing impossible, usually is losing the debate.. LOL

Would you turn down a raise if offered one?

Or demand to be paid a much lower than normal salary for you job?

By the same logic you espouse against working from home, you should lest you make it more likely that your job will be outsourced.

 

[wtburnette]

Two fallacies I'm detecting:

1) Nobody is saying this concept is "new;" only that a lot of companies weren't looking at it.

2) When you say "outsourcing" at least 3 of you are jumping to the conclusion that means "Overseas."

I think you guys are kinda talking around the point, but missing each other. I think we all understand the "laws of business." Jobs that can be outsourced, will eventually be outsourced. And nobody claimed artificially moving back to the office will stop that; that is a red-herring. Once the genie is out of the bottle, and management pries their eyes open, there is no going back. I think we agree that increasing efficiency _should_ make outsourcing less likely, if everyone is perceiving the situation clearly.

...but there's the problem.

What is being advanced here, is that a lot of managers *DID NOT* have their eyes open the past two decades. Companies and individual managers were _opposed_ to the concept of remote work in the past. They didn't like the idea. They really had no opportunity to observe how much of the actual work could be done remotely, because they couldn't take the blinders off and get past their natural, knee-jerk reaction of opposing it. Some old-school farts just plain like to see butts in seats, because that's how they lived their lives so far.

Is that bad management? Yes, probably. But "bad management" is not illegal. It's actually quite common. A philosophical objection to bad management, doesn't make it not exist.

The point is not logically arguable: a lot, and I mean a WHOLE lot, of companies and managers got their myopic, mediocrity-tinted eyes forcibly opened to the possibilities of remote work by having it forced down their throats in the COVID Plandemic. And now that their eyes are finally open, there is going to be a change in attitude. The fact that this change in attitude *COULD HAVE* or *SHOULD HAVE* already happened before, is irrelevant.

Management was previously operating within a perceived constraint that WFH was not allowable, and they would lose market share to competitors because their service level would somehow degrade if they tried it.

That artificial perceived constraint has now been stripped away and proven wrong. And companies are seeing potential they did not see before. It's not that the potential didn't exist. Of course it existed. It's just that mediocre management didn't recognize it. And whether you want to accept it or not - perception is (was) reality.

INGOMike is correct - once the blinders are stripped away, clueless management is going to:

1) See possibilities they didn't _think_ were possible before, and
2) Begin wondering what _else_ they weren't seeing before, and start searching and exploring for that.

I'm just telling you, with my own company as Exhibit A, that those other options don't have to be "China" or "India." It can be Mississippi, or Puerto Rico, or Virgin Islands. That's what happens when companies have their eyes opened. They start looking for options, and getting creative.

Nobody is saying that WTBurnette going back into the office will stop that. I'm just saying...enjoy your situation now, because certain aspects of it, like most things in life, may not be permanent.

For the last part, luckily WFH has been possible in my field for decades. It's been cyclical and my issue is that it took the plandemic for it to be recognized that some jobs, some teams, some individuals can and should WFH, or at least be given the opportunity. Some positions may eventually be outsourced, but I don't think many or even most will be. Just my personal opinion.

The management part doesn't only pertain to remote workers. There are way too many bad managers. One of the essential parts of a mangers job is knowing what productivity the team should be able to handle per month so that they can gauge that each employee is performing up to expectations. You should have an idea of each individuals workload and what they're able to produce. Knowing this means that you can adequately manage the personnel, regardless of whether they're in the office or not. Butts in seats managers **** me off. That is fast food mentality. Wiping a clean counter every time the boss looks over so that you seem busy. It's a waste of time. Then again, I'm also the person that hates the 40+ hour work week. I think that roles should be productivity based, not hourly based. I'm working for the best manager I've ever had right now because she gets it. She says as long as the work is done, she doesn't care how many hours are put in or where I'm working from. Yes, I'll enjoy this ride as long as possible.

 

[two70]

Two fallacies I'm detecting:

1) Nobody is saying this concept is "new;" only that a lot of companies weren't looking at it before - and now they are.

2) When you say "outsourcing" at least 2 of you (Matlock and 270) are automatically jumping to the conclusion that means "Overseas." And it doesn't mean that.

I think you guys are kinda talking around the point, but missing each other. I think we all understand the "laws of business." Jobs that can be outsourced, will eventually be outsourced. And nobody claimed artificially moving back to the office will stop that; that is a red-herring. Once the genie is out of the bottle, and management pries their eyes open, there is no going back. I think we agree that increasing efficiency _should_ make outsourcing less likely, if everyone is perceiving the situation clearly.

...but there's the problem.

What is being argued here, is that a lot of managers *DID NOT* have their eyes open the past two decades. Companies and individual managers were _opposed_ to the concept of remote work in the past. They didn't like the idea. (WTB, your entire thread is based on this premise, so you of all people should get that). They really had no opportunity to observe how much of the actual work could be done remotely, because they couldn't take the blinders off and get past their natural, knee-jerk reaction of opposing it. Some old-school farts just plain like to see butts in seats, because that's how they lived their lives so far. They were operating within the idea-constraint that office work was the only valid option that could serve their customer effectively and prevent people from slacking off - *THEREFORE* - their eyes could not see any possibility outside of that constraint.

Is that bad management? Yes, probably. But "bad management" is not illegal. It's actually quite common. A philosophical objection to bad management, doesn't make it not exist.

The point is not logically arguable: a lot, and I mean a WHOLE lot, of companies and managers got their myopic, mediocrity-tinted eyes forcibly opened to the possibilities of remote work by having it forced down their throats in the COVID Plandemic. And now that their eyes are finally open, there is going to be a change in attitude. The fact that this change in attitude *COULD HAVE* or *SHOULD HAVE* already happened before, is irrelevant.

Management was previously operating within a perceived constraint that WFH was not allowable, and they would lose market share to competitors because their service level would somehow degrade if they tried it.

That artificial perceived constraint has now been stripped away and proven wrong. And companies are seeing potential they did not see before. It's not that the potential didn't exist. Of course it existed. It's just that mediocre management didn't recognize it. And whether you want to accept it or not - perception is (was) reality.

INGOMike is correct - once the blinders are stripped away, clueless management is going to:

1) See possibilities they didn't _think_ were possible before, and
2) Begin wondering what _else_ they weren't seeing before, and start searching and exploring for that.

I'm just telling you, with my own company as Exhibit A, that those other options don't have to be "China" or "India." It can be Mississippi, or Puerto Rico, or Virgin Islands. That's what happens when companies have their eyes opened. They start looking for options, and getting creative.

Nobody is saying that WTBurnette going back into the office will stop that. I'm just saying...enjoy your situation now, because certain aspects of it, like most things in life, may not be permanent.

The post I responded to specifically mentioned outsourcing to third world countries.

Also, that companies "had their eyes opened" and are now looking at outsourcing is sorta indicative that it is rather too late to worry about as that horse has already left the barn.

I think you're conflating evidence a job can be accomplished remotely with evidence that a job can be accomplished remotely in China, India, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Mississippi, or anywhere else. That is two, potentially, very different decisions.

I'm not sure why any adult would think much of anything is permanent in this day and age, especially in the working world. I agree with enjoying a good situation while it lasts, my whole point was, if you're replaceable, which almost everyone is, it is pretty silly to spend time worrying about every little thing making you more replaceable.

 

[Twangbanger]

For the last part, luckily WFH has been possible in my field for decades. It's been cyclical and my issue is that it took the plandemic for it to be recognized that some jobs, some teams, some individuals can and should WFH, or at least be given the opportunity. Some positions may eventually be outsourced, but I don't think many or even most will be. Just my personal opinion.

The management part doesn't only pertain to remote workers. There are way too many bad managers. One of the essential parts of a mangers job is knowing what productivity the team should be able to handle per month so that they can gauge that each employee is performing up to expectations. You should have an idea of each individuals workload and what they're able to produce. Knowing this means that you can adequately manage the personnel, regardless of whether they're in the office or not. Butts in seats managers **** me off. That is fast food mentality. Wiping a clean counter every time the boss looks over so that you seem busy. It's a waste of time. Then again, I'm also the person that hates the 40+ hour work week. I think that roles should be productivity based, not hourly based. I'm working for the best manager I've ever had right now because she gets it. She says as long as the work is done, she doesn't care how many hours are put in or where I'm working from. Yes, I'll enjoy this ride as long as possible.

That is the kind of manager I like, and I want to be *that* guy. Unfortunately in government contract work, we have this old-school "charge by the hour" accounting system that's been stood-up for years as the Gold Standard for preventing the taxpayer getting ripped off. In reality it just ensures the survival of the Military Industrial Complex by creating the wrong incentives. I get the point of how it all works, because we don't want certain American manufacturing capabilities to become extinct within our shores. But it's a very blunt instrument that kills the efficiency-mindset.

We have always been protected by ITAR and the inability to move work outside the U.S. Work-From-Home was like a light bulb going off in our company's head. It had always allowed some small level of remote work, for very intelligent scientists who had the type of skill set that only a handful of people in the country possess. But COVID was like a "bing" lightbulb moment. Now they're like, "Wait a minute...we went from 1% to 90+% in a year and the world didn't end...Virgin Islands is U.S. Citizens...same with PR...let's set up shop there." It happened, and COVID was the instigator. Industry needed something to get them off their dead , and they got it.

Everybody was afraid to try WFH. Now that COVID pushed everybody's competitors' feet into the water at the same time, the creativity is just getting started. We haven't begun to see the dimensions of this yet. Right now companies can't process it, because it's just so hard to get people in general. All the incentives are pushing toward a very decentralized work-force. I really believe the mileage geography involved isn't going to matter. It's just going to happen in stages. It won't be all at once.

Bottom line, this Pandemic accelerated into 5 years what could have otherwise taken 50. We are at the perihelion of this being "good" for "us." Right now we as individual employees are getting most of the benefits of the arrangement. We have increased our net-takehome without leaving the house. But The Casino has noticed, and in the end, they will catch up and make it work to their benefit.

 

[WebSnyper]

Not meaning to sound like a wise guy, but as far as jobs being eliminated, sublet or just going out of business. every job that I ever lost was a job that was on location every day. One field tech job, I was actually terminated on Friday, and no one called me because I was on a break down out of state. I was working around the clock so I was none the wiser.

When I got off the plane at O'hare the next Wednesday, my company credit card did not work. I called into the office and they told me the whole department was eliminated. They did eventually balance my expense account, but it was still crappy.

The company that had taken over soon ran the whole place into the ground.

If someone in charge of the money cuts you loose, it does not matter who you are or where you perform your tasks.

I knew of a situation where a company waited to fire a guy on Tuesday after a holiday weekend because he was on call over the holiday weekend... That was some low stuff right there.

 

[wtburnette]

That is the kind of manager I like, and I want to be *that* guy. Unfortunately in government contract work, we have this old-school "charge by the hour" accounting system that's been stood-up for years as the Gold Standard for preventing the taxpayer getting ripped off. In reality it just ensures the survival of the Military Industrial Complex by creating the wrong incentives. I get the point of how it all works, because we don't want certain American manufacturing capabilities to become extinct within our shores. You don't want Chinese Chips in your hypersonic weapon and all that. But it's a very blunt instrument that kills the efficiency-mindset.

We have always been protected by ITAR and the inability to move work outside the U.S. Work-From-Home was like a light bulb going off in our company's head. It had always allowed some small level of remote work, for very intelligent scientists who had the type of skill set that only a handful of people in the country possess. But COVID was like a "bing" lightbulb moment. Now they're like, "Wait a minute...we went from 1% to 90+% in a year and the world didn't end...Puerto Rico is U.S. Citizens...Virgin Islands is U.S. Citizens...let's set up shop there." It happened, and COVID was the instigator. Industry needed something to get them off their dead , and they got it.

Everybody was afraid to try WFH. Now that COVID pushed everybody's competitors' feet into the water at the same time, the creativity is just getting started. We haven't begun to see the dimensions of this yet. Right now companies can't process it, because it's just so hard to get people in general. All the incentives are pushing toward a very decentralized work-force. I really believe the mileage geography involved isn't going to matter. It's just going to happen in stages. It won't be all at once.

Bottom line, this Pandemic accelerated into 5 years what could have otherwise taken 50. We are at the perihelion of this being "good" for "us." Right now we as individual employees are getting most of the benefits of the arrangement. We have increased our net-takehome without leaving the house. But The Casino has noticed, and in the end, they will catch up and make it work to their benefit.

Yep, for certain segments of the market I agree, especially ones that were repressed from working from home previously.

I knew of a situation where a company waited to fire a guy on Tuesday after a holiday weekend because he was on call over the holiday weekend... That was some low stuff right there.

That is some cold right there.

 

[KLB]

I knew of a situation where a company waited to fire a guy on Tuesday after a holiday weekend because he was on call over the holiday weekend... That was some low stuff right there.

Just like laying people off right before the holidays.

 

[AtTheMurph]

Most jobs are for the average, though. I'm sure it's industry dependent, but IT sure got hammered by the Indian J3 invasion, and then with high speed data making remote working even easier a lot of programming jobs moved abroad. A lot of programming is basically a commodity and doesn't require the best and brightest. I watched salaries plummet in the post dot com bust, and while that was an especially rough time and salaries did recover some the role of both outsourcing and tech visas kept the salaries lower then they otherwise would have been.

Sure, the best and brightest can still write their own tickets but that's not most of us by definition.

Those people who are not worth more will not get more. That's just the way it is. Value is paid.

As the world gets wealthier and education better (or worse as the case may be) in other countries, low value jobs will be filled by people willing to work for low value pay, relatively speaking.

The problem for the USA is that the dollar is the reserve currency meaning it is more valuable than it otherwise would be. Other countries have a high demand for dollars to conduct trade. High demand means higher price.

That translates as paying people in dollars is more expensive than paying them in yuan, rupees, dong, peso, real or whatever else they might be paid in. It is the reason that manufacturing has moved off shore and will be the reason that American workers are seen as not being competitive. Being the reserve currency means an outsized standard of living in the reserve country but it also means the gutting of industry in that reserve country as other countries goods become much more competitively priced because of the currency imbalances.

It is all baked in but it isn't a permanent condition. Eventually reserve status ends. Competitiveness will return but not without years of hardships and agony.

 

[HoughMade]

Ironically, at 11:45a today, I received an e-mail from my secretary stating that she was resigning as of noon....so there's that. The plus side is that my "former" secretary has been working remotely from Arizona since she moved there is April and can fill the gap until we hire someone.

Also, regarding the "great shuffling" that I see as more accurate than the "great resignation", my son has taken a new job in IT with a 50+% raise in pay. However, some brand new-IT guy will fill his vacated job shortly as it is a good starter IT job.

Like I said, it's moving pieces around the board. That has its own challenges and hurts efficiency, but it's not going to be a persistent problem.

 

[wtburnette]

Ironically, at 11:45a today, I received an e-mail from my secretary stating that she was resigning as of noon....so there's that. The plus side is that my "former" secretary has been working remotely from Arizona since she moved there is April and can fill the gap until we hire someone.

Also, regarding the "great shuffling" that I see as more accurate than the "great resignation", my son has taken a new job in IT with a 50+% raise in pay. However, some brand new-IT guy will fill his vacated job shortly as it is a good starter IT job.

Like I said, it's moving pieces around the board. That has its own challenges and hurts efficiency, but it's not going to be a persistent problem.

Yep, I think the temporary problem may just sort itself out. Those who really want the ability to WFH will find companies that will allow them to do so.

 

[HoughMade]

I'll note that the enhanced unemployment benefits are just now expiring in Indiana. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next month or so.

 

[actaeon277]

Ironically, at 11:45a today, I received an e-mail from my secretary stating that she was resigning as of noon....so there's that. The plus side is that my "former" secretary has been working remotely from Arizona since she moved there is April and can fill the gap until we hire someone.

Also, regarding the "great shuffling" that I see as more accurate than the "great resignation", my son has taken a new job in IT with a 50+% raise in pay. However, some brand new-IT guy will fill his vacated job shortly as it is a good starter IT job.

Like I said, it's moving pieces around the board. That has its own challenges and hurts efficiency, but it's not going to be a persistent problem.

Wow. That sucks.
I imagine I would try to give better notice than that.
Course, after the navy, I put in just about 30 years at the mill. So, it's not like I have a lot of experience leaving jobs.
I just tried to submit retirement paperwork for the end of January.
And they told me they wouldn't take it this early. I had to call back end of november.

 

[wtburnette]

A 15 minute notice is pretty out of the ordinary.

 

[Leo]

A 15 minute notice is pretty out of the ordinary.

It was out of the ordinary in office type work, not any more. My wife said that many of the younger women in the hospital just quit showing up, no call, no notice, no email, no resignation letter. These are college educated girls with training in their field. Different times.

Short notice has never been uncommon in heavy construction. Many workers have been sent home at the end of the shift according to material, scheduling or other issues. Conversely, in that environment many of those same construction workers have walked into the foreman's trailer and said, "I am not happy, get me my money," and dragged up at the end of the shift.

 

[Twangbanger]

Wow. That sucks.
I imagine I would try to give better notice than that.
Course, after the navy, I put in just about 30 years at the mill. So, it's not like I have a lot of experience leaving jobs.
I just tried to submit retirement paperwork for the end of January.
And they told me they wouldn't take it this early. I had to call back end of november.

You have to get that Orange Stuff out of the water before you can retire.