Big Greedy Companies

[rickhd]

A few years ago the company I work for was sold to another company. Usually there are job loses when two companies merge. This did happen and is still happening 2 years later. My job may also be on the chopping block.

The company is in a out of control cost cutting mode that makes no sense at all. The company is not hurting they are making billions. To make matters worse they are discussing shipping jobs off to India. They work cheap by what I understand .50 cents to $1 per hour on average. We have been told they will work 7 days a week and they don't complain like us Canadians.

If all our good paying Canadian jobs go to another country what is left for Canadians. Working at the 7-11 for minimum wage. Come to think of it these people who are taking the jobs overseas also run the variety stores.

What are these companies thinking, if we start losing good paying jobs who in this country is going to have any money to buy those goods and services. We then become the 3rd world country.

To me this is nothing but out of control corporate greed, how much money does one person or company need.

[Mexicanuck]

That's free enterprise for you, mate. And as Hairball says at http://www.digitalhomecanada.com/for...0&postcount=17,

Originally Posted by Hairball

The free enterpise model is the only model that that will succeed in the long haul. History has proven this time and time again. Can people not see past their noses.

While some people think that free enterprise is the only worthwhile model, others think that being able to keep one's nose in sight is a pretty good idea.

Resistance is not futile. Do not submit.

[hugh]

The company I worked for most recently, who is a major stakeholder in a certain Canadian satellite radio venture, sold the company I was working for and anybody who made a decent buck was toasted.

I didn't even meet with a member of the new company!

The selling company is filthy rich and probably some of the proceeds will fund the development of satellite radio in Canada

Was I pissed off? Yes

Do I begrudge them? No

My first IT job, I was about hire 30 in a company that went to 120 and sadly I left when it got back down to 60 (about a month before they axed about 40 people.) We were in enterprise systems and despite having a great product, our potential customers typically passed us over for SAP or Peoplesoft.

would I change the capitalist system? No.

The luddites took hammers to the equipment during the beginning of the industrial revolution saying that it would destroy all the jobs. Same with the buggy whip manufacturers.

The dislocation can be tragic but the alternative is worse.

[57]

Provided the playing field is level, then I agree with what Hugh said. Unfortunately, right now, the playing field is a bit "unlevel" because the places where many of the jobs are going don't have the social infrastructure, or the pollution controls of the west.

As that society becomes richer, then the infrastructure and the pollution controls will be there, but the jobs will be gone to some extent.

The firm I work for (almost every firm is doing this these days) is cutting 5% of its staff every year, just to see how far they can go and how much of the load the other employee pick up or how much business they'll lose. If the employees don't gripe too much and if they keep their business, they do another 5% next year. It's the 80/20 rule at work. At some point though the cutting will have an effect and at that point will the company survive?

They preach about 6 sigma, total quality, etc. Bull!!. The quality and service are suffering...

Do Management care? - Not much, their (huge) bonuses are tied to short term performance and many of them are in the job for the short term as well. Many don't care what company they work for, they just rake in the millions and don't care what happens to the "minions".

[RigPig]

A lot of big corporations don't actually 'do' or 'create' much of anything. Plenty of very large outfits 'acquire' smaller outfits in the interest of 'expansion'. What happens usually is they will stay in the shadows for a time, maybe 1, 2 years and watch the new acquisition operate on it's own. Then they gradually start exerting an influence and making changes and most usually it's staff/payroll cuts as that is usually where the biggest expenses lie. Happened to my company, but i got off staff prior to the new owner getting their 'mudhooks' in everything. I still work there but as a private contractor, so i've been immune to most of the BS the actual employees have had to endure under the new 'management'.

[os]

I think the employees should be aware that they don't matter for the corporation. They should stop working as hard for them and start working more for themselves. Improve and diversify skills (if possible during working hours) and continously look for a better job (preferably during working hours). When you are not doing any of the above, take a break. Those greedy companies will treat you like ****, you need to treat them the same.

[ilovemusic]

Almost the exact same scenerio for my bro in law, except he had to find out about the company closing down after we all saw it on tv...How cold and heartless is that??? The next day he has a local tv camera in his face....He said he felt violated, and betrayed by his own company

So the company is closing in October , he has to stay until the last day to get his severence (sp) pay, yet in the meantime they want him to go to another one of their companies( more profitable) to teach them how to run the main machines - how arrogant is that,


... the fact that they didn't let their employees know about the closing of the plant until after it was on tv , just made him furious so he refuses to help them get their other plant off the ground..... He could take the main posiition in this other company, but his family would be uprooted and he would have to move hundreds of miles away lol yeah right

[David_Hanlon]

Originally Posted by 57

Provided the playing field is level, then I agree with what Hugh said. Unfortunately, right now, the playing field is a bit "unlevel" because the places where many of the jobs are going don't have the social infrastructure, or the pollution controls of the west.

As that society becomes richer, then the infrastructure and the pollution controls will be there, but the jobs will be gone to some extent....

This is what bothers me about outsourcing. A company will say that it's "just business" when they ship jobs overseas. Yet they continue to operate here, enjoying the benefits of the infrastructure we have, but sharing less and less in the costs to provide/maintain that infrastructure.

As '57' said, when infrastructure costs become an issue in the outsourcing location, then pick up and move again.

[Jake]

I think this has happened to all of us at one time or another. It took me almost 18 months to find another job once I realized the company was heading in the wrong direction. Underbidding contracts, forced resignations, pay-cuts, restrictions on work hours, restrictions on when we take lunch, elimination of field pay, captive work hours, after hours calls at home or on vacation. This all came about when the company was purchased and taken over by somebody new to the industry. I felt they saw a big juicy potential to make money and that is exactly what they did. They lasted 2 years and sold off their shares after some creative bookkeeping. We were being told to cut corners and spread ourselves too thin. It came back to bite us in the arse of course. Of the original staff only one guy stayed around as he figured he was too old to find alternative employment. The last I heard from him the company has not raised salaries in years and this year knocked another 5% off. How a company in the oil and gas sector cannot make a profit in this economy is a big mystery to me or is it?

[Coasterdon]

I work for a company that helps other companies send work offshore and it makes me sick. I am tired of hearing how this will eventually help North America and how we will adapt with new jobs. No we won't. I don't see this happening at all. Wake up people. Soon China and India will be the economic and political superpowers. We will be also rans.

[GQUEUE]

I've been following this thread and I very much feel for those who have been impacted by these sort of actions. I don't necessarily disagree with what people are saying here, but just some thoughts I would like to express:

1. Obviously, the OP is directly impact by this and he is using his post to 'vent'. But I have to take issue with the subtle racist remark made, as I believe it to be 'sour grapes'. Ever try working a variety store?? Its hard work, and you shouldn't bitch about the ethnicity of the people doing the work, because they were the only ones willing to do it (which is why they own all the stores now).

2. Companies have an obligation to maximize their value and profits. That's it. If you want to work for an organization with different goals, work for a charity or the government and tell us about how much better it is.

3. 57's comment about quality, etc... is accurate. Its all marketing and perception.

4. A lot of the dire predictions made here are the same ones made when a lot of manufacturing jobs left North America for Asia and other areas. And yet, I don't see anyone hesitating to go to a Walmart or Home Depot to buy something made in China. There were a lot of people hurt during those transitions and likewise, there will be a lot of people hurt in the current outsourcing transition for IT/Technology. But our society is not all gloom and doom because of it. We will endure. It just won't be painless.

5. Unfortunately, the era of a one career lifestyle is more/less over. It is becoming more and more common for someone to transition to 2 or 3 careers over their lifetime because the dynamics of the work force change so rapidly. Some people may not like it, but its a fact of life in the modern world. Bitching about it will not change anything.

I really do empathize with anyone who's lost their job or been laid off because of circumstances out of their control. But frankly, this didn't just come out of nowhere. The writing has been on the wall for over 10 years. And if it wasn't outsourcing, it might have been something else (like automation or AI) which might have been the cause.

Lastly, for those who may be interested, try picking up copy of a book called 'Who moved my Cheese?'. A very short read and yet quite insightful into how people are affected and deal with change.

[Chris Auld]

Consider a Canadian firm which once produced its own widgets but now buys them from India (widget production has been "outsourced," some might say, misleadingly, these jobs have been "shipped overseas.") A bunch of people in India are then working and using resources to make widgets, and then they send them to Canada. Unfortunately, we don't get those shiny new widgets for nothing: in turn a bunch of Canadians have got to produce something which will one way or another reimburse those Indian folks. In effect, international trade is a technology, one that produces imports (such as widgets) with exports (such as computer software or lumber). Luddites were mentioned earlier, quite appropriately.

We could prevent all this from occuring by having the government erect trade barriers, but we would not be better off by doing so. We would not have more jobs -- trade has very little effect on employment rates. And we would not have better jobs, indeed, our standard of living would be lower. We have high-paying jobs not be sheer good fortune, to be protected from foreigners who would steal them away, but rather because we are a productive nation. And one of the reasons that we are productive is that we are open to international trade -- we would have fewer, not more, good jobs if we tried to shield ourselves from international markets.

Simply, it isn't true that we are "shipping jobs overseas." It isn't true that trade is zero-sum: if other countries gain by trading with us that doesn't imply we lost something, and in most gains we gain too.

[hugh]

to echo Chris' point, China is now a huge buyer of many products on the world stage from raw materials to sophisticated computing and nuclear power technology.

Although the U.S. has a huge trade deficit with China, the rest of the world is a net exporter to China.

[Coasterdon]

I read the book. It was required at my last job. I understand the concept. I adapt well to change but what jobs over a lifetime are you talking about? I see jobs going away. I don't see a lot being created that are not low paying or temporary types. If you decide to go to school to become an engineer and all engineering type jobs go away is that person suppposed to throw away that schooling and become a teacher? What do we tell kids going to school now? Take 4 years of this but you will have to do something else later? Yes I know companies need to make money but don't they also have any other responsibilities?

[GQUEUE]

Originally Posted by Coasterdon

.. If you decide to go to school to become an engineer and all engineering type jobs go away is that person suppposed to throw away that schooling and become a teacher? What do we tell kids going to school now? Take 4 years of this but you will have to do something else later?

Simply, yes, if there are a lack of engineering jobs and but a surplus of teaching jobs, we should encourage people to migrate to become teachers. Eventually, there may not be any teaching jobs, but there might be jobs for accountants or lawyers or health care.

During the late 90's because of the dot com boom and the impending Y2K 'crisis' a lot of people migrated to the IT field because of the demand and the high pay being offered. Don't recall anyone calling those people greedy. I know some people who were able to retire because of it. But now that the demand has subsided and there is a more cost-effective alternative, people complain that its not fair???

We should be telling kids in school the realities of what to expect and how they might address it.

Originally Posted by Coasterdon

Yes I know companies need to make money but don't they also have any other responsibilities?

Actually, no they don't. If they did, they wouldn't pollute or make toxic chemicals that kill people or do a bunch of other unethical stuff. They get away with it because there is very little incentive for a company to be a good corporate citizen (except on paper). If a company can make $100M profit and also execute a lot of ethical and responsible programs OR can make $300M and then write a few cheques to some charities, what do think they will do?

Let's put this another way. If I were to invent a new liquid (call is Qline) which can directly replace gasoline and is half the price and results in a fraction of the pollution, who thinks this would be great? But wouldn't this result in the demise of the Oil companies and the loss of all those Canadian jobs in AB and elsewhere? What would happen to all those people? And what about all the other companies that supply products and services to the Oil companies? They would be negatively impacted as well. But would any of you tell me not to make Qline because of this negative impact?

And likewise, who believes that the Oil companies wouldn't use any weapon available (false marketing, misleading propoganda, political lobbying, etc..) to prevent Qline from coming onto the market. So much for ethical responsibilities.