H1-B Problem Taking Care of Itself

Post #72,469 by gdaustin 1/4/03 1:16:26 PM Reply	H1-B Problem Taking Care of Itself Right now, the H1-B problem is rapidly taking care of itself. I visited monster.com recently for jobs that I'm qualified for, and guess what? Every single posting asked for a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. If the INS will just do it's job, this problem will take care of itself. The amount of money in legal and advertising costs to make a position H1-B eligible is high. Basically, you have to file paperwork (which requires "consulting" from a law firm) to request H1-B positions. Then you have to advertise those positions in two "approved" national publications for 30-60 days. If no qualified employees apply, then you are permitted to accept H1-B applicants. This information from a consulting firm I used to work for. All this costs about $10K to $15K. When the economy was wide open and positions would go begging, then this extra work was worth the effort to get an H1-B. With the economy lousy, job applications are flooding into these firms, so the 30-60 day publication period thing doesn't work, because there are lots of qualified appliants. One article I read recently said that out of 200,000 available H1-B visa, only about 45,000 had been issued so far in 2002. The H1-B issue has now been moved to healthcare, where there is a nursing shortage, a family practice doctor shortage, and ER doctor shortage, a radiology tech shortage, etc. H1-Bs and unions are a moot point for IT workers. Programming jobs are moving overseas, call centers are moving overseas, mainly because of our failure to make large numbers of software experts available in the U.S. and cost pressures. A programmer with a master's degree in India makes $20,000 a year (U.S.). Indian universities are graduating 500,000 new software developers a year. Companies are simply going where the numbers tell them that there will be a solid supply of people who can and will develop software. I have the same fundamental issues that most of you do, that our country should promote better and faster education in areas where there are skills shortages. In the U.S., we are graduating 50,000 people a year with computer degrees. Most colleges are cutting professor's salaries, trying to find professors who will teach for little pay as a second job. We have 3rd rate education in this country, so we'll quickly lose out to India as the world leader in software development. Actually, we may have already lost. Most public four year universities are completely strapped for funds, are letting decades old buildings fall down, not having the funds to replace them, not having funds to buy new computers and software, capping enrollment, and spending more and more money on security for the rich, but delinquent students they must teach (who don't appreciate their position in life, or the kind of opportunity a college education represents). So, you want my take on this? It is our completely CRAPPY educational system that has created this mess. Our focus on diversity, lawsuits, lack of integrity and ethics, and our lack of focus on paying teachers and professors well, and giving them the latitude to flunk poor students and maintain academic standards is OUR FAULT that the programming jobs are moving overseas. We need some industry leaders to take up the mantle, get funded, and find a few hundred thousand of the smartest kids in America to lead us into the next decade or two. Otherwise, locus of power from the information economy will move overseas, much as the industrial economy locus of power moved from Europe to the U.S. in the 1800s. Asia will rule the world from a technology perspective, and we will be standing on the sidelines. Glen Austin
Post #72,637 by bluke 1/5/03 8:01:54 AM 1/5/03 8:06:55 AM Reply	Mostly cost pressure As you yourself point out, an Indian programmer with a Master's degree only costs $20,000 a year. It is hard to compete with costs like that no matter how good or bad the education system in the US is. The company where I work is basically only hiring in India these days because it is so much cheaper. I can't really complain, I work for a big US company in Israel, American companies (like IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, HP, Intel, etc.) opened development centers in Israel for 2 reasons: 1. It is cheaper then the US (these days about %30 cheaper) 2. Talented people Edited by bluke Jan. 5, 2003, 08:06:55 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,660 by deSitter 1/5/03 11:48:10 AM Reply	Wrong If there is an upswing in tech (and there will be), the H-1B issue will return to prominence. The reason will be the same as before - greedy opportunisits in tech centers. There is only one way to deal with management - and that is to empower workers. But this group of workers we belong to seems to be too self-satisfied to admit a need for any protection from management. -drl
Post #72,700 by Arkadiy 1/5/03 3:00:37 PM Reply	Is that really your dream? Different classes of people for finding errors in code and fixing them? 3 different unions to turn off a machine, and a fourth to fix it? You're asking for artificial caps on productivity. Well, guess what - money will go where productivity is higher. It's already doing that. The real answer is for us to give up our inflated salaries and come back to Earth. If someone can do what I am doing for 1/5th or 1/3rd of my salary, he'll get hired. Sorry, basic math. (On the other hand, the only Indian MS of CS I've met has been exceptionally dumb. If Indian universities produce that kind of programmers, we have nothing to fear. Come to think about it, I am yet to see a first-rate programmer from India. I keep hearing about them, but haven't met any. Some good folk from China, some from Israel, but none from India so far). -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #72,701 by orion 1/5/03 3:04:24 PM Reply	A dream shared those kinds of people are called debuggers, and some programmers are not good enough to fix the bugs in their own code. When I worked at the law firm, I had to fix the programs from other programmers because of all the bugs in it. I had to work extra for no extra pay and it put my own projects behind because their projects were givien priority over mine to work on. If I was a debugger, I would work on someone else's code all day and fix it before it gets released. So that way the Code Monkeys could hammer out code in 15 seconds, have the QA people test it, and if it fails, send it to the debuggers, like me, to fix it. For an Alternative Nearly To Imitate IWETHEY please visit [link\|http://pub75.ezboard.com/bantiiwethey\|the ANTIIWETHEY Board] providing an alternative to IWETHEY since December 2002
Post #72,706 by deSitter 1/5/03 3:13:21 PM Reply	Re: Is that really your dream? My "dream" is a healthy, stable, and productive economy. But, as to the points made: Different classes of people for finding errors in code and fixing them? 3 different unions to turn off a machine, and a fourth to fix it? Nonsense. IT is like electricity, or plumbling, or the truck fleet. Does that mean you can't work in accounting and know something about IT? Of course not. Such a person may even hold some administrative authority over his local systems. But the infrastructure of computing is clearly identifiable, requires specific skills, and demands specialized personnel, like a truck fleet or a plumbing system or an electrical power grid. You're asking for artificial caps on productivity. Well, guess what - money will go where productivity is higher. It's already doing that. The real answer is for us to give up our inflated salaries and come back to Earth. If someone can do what I am doing for 1/5th or 1/3rd of my salary, he'll get hired. Sorry, basic math. I don't know exactly what you are saying here. Elaborate. -drl
Post #72,858 by bluke 1/6/03 3:37:16 AM 1/6/03 3:45:17 AM Reply	Unions kill productivity in many ways 1. Unions hold down productivity by introducing ridiculous work rules such as the ones mentioned above (a personal example, I couldn't move my PC 3 feet to another desk, it had to be done by the union). 2. Seniority rules - the longer you are on the job the more money you make, the better shifts you get, etc. nothing to do with your ability. You could be an idiot, but if you are a 20 year veteran idiot you are compensated better then a new guy who has some great new ideas. 3. Can't lay people off or fire them - Do you know how hard it is to fire a unionized city worker? It is basically impossible. The guy can sit around and do nothing all day but his managers can't touch him. 4. Other - unions are almost against merit bonuses, for example the UFT (United Federation of Teachers) has consistently opposed merit pay [link\|http://www.nycp.org/Web_News/General_Partnership/NYPOST_COM%20Regional%20News%20KLEIN'S%20BOOSTER%20$HOT%20By%20CARL%20CAMPANILE.htm\|KLEIN'S BOOSTER $HOT] "United Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten said Klein had the right to reward his top managers - but continues to oppose merit pay for teachers. " I wonder why? Edited by bluke Jan. 6, 2003, 03:45:17 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,863 by broomberg 1/6/03 6:37:46 AM 1/6/03 6:38:21 AM Reply	Bad example As much as I agree with your sentiment, your PC example is not good. PCs are connected to the network. PCs can affect the network when there is a flaky connection. Users ignore cable strain. Users think they can do no harm. Users move PCs, introduce a problem that takes days to tracks down, affecting everyone on their hub/switch/workgroup. While YOU may be perfectly capable of moving your PC without damage, there are very few of you compared to the unwashed masses, and that rule should stay for most organizations. Except for mine of course. I'm the only end-user with a 200' power cord to the computer room so I can use the big UPSs for my office. So of course, I also have my own switch and subnet. Edited by broomberg Jan. 6, 2003, 06:38:21 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,881 by bluke 1/6/03 10:08:54 AM 1/6/03 10:26:33 AM Reply	Duplicate post - ignore Edited by bluke Jan. 6, 2003, 10:26:33 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,894 by boxley 1/6/03 10:36:09 AM Reply	HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! sorry couldnt help it A lot of developers are a menace, present company excepted of course, thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] You think that you can trust the government to look after your rights? ask an Indian
Post #72,886 by bluke 1/6/03 10:18:12 AM Reply	Not really ... For a number of reasons. Firstly, developers are not the unwashed masses. Developers need flexibility and can usually be trusted to handle these kinds of minor issues. This is exactly the problem with unions. They create very rigid rules that can NEVER be bent or broken. This is clearly anti-productivity. Secondly, the network administrator was ok with it and was willing to help me, except that he also wasn't allowed as he wasn't part of the union either. In fact, the union guy who eventually came to move my PC was not exactly a PC "expert", he was a guy who moved things.
Post #72,892 by orion 1/6/03 10:34:12 AM Reply	But remember this not all developers are hardware experts. I know this to be a fact. I recall one of them moving his PC and he put a crimp in his Cat5 cable which caused a network condition that took down a hub. Another one bumped the PC so much that it caused the hard drive connector to become unplugged. The worst case of all, was two developers who took a scanner to an out of state office. I told them to park the scanning head using the software that came with the unit, and then to put the green plastic thingie in place to prevent movement while they drove it there in their car. When they got to the other office, the scanner would not work anymore. They apparently ignored my instructions on how to secure the scanner from the bumpy roads they took. But they blamed it on the software I helped develop. Until I told them to use the scanner software to try and scan in something, and it did the same thing. Then they confessed that they didn't do a thing to secure the scanner before they moved it. So who needs a Union to mess things up? This was back in 1995 when Scanners were expensive. For an Alternative Nearly To Imitate IWETHEY please visit [link\|http://pub75.ezboard.com/bantiiwethey\|the ANTIIWETHEY Board] providing an alternative to IWETHEY since December 2002
Post #73,022 by static 1/6/03 5:48:25 PM Reply	You have the heart of it. I've been in a position where the network administrators trusted me to do things for myself that they should do. But I only ever needed to call on them when I had a problem beyond my control (e.g. with a server). If we'd been unionised, they wouldn't have been able to grant me that. Which was exactly the problem you cited. Wade. Microsoft are clearly boiling the frogs.
Post #73,067 by tonytib 1/6/03 9:21:05 PM Reply	Actually, there are ways around their rigid rules Based on talking with people who've done automation work in auto plants, the union rules can be a real pain. However....if you can get union supervisor to like you, he may "look the other way" while you do action X (flip a breaker, etc). But, that's not a good way to run a business (relying on ignoring stupid rules to get work done in a timely manner). Then again, neither is forcing unpaid overtime on hourly workers (see Walmart in Oregon). So there is a very valid place for unions. Also, I don't there should be any inherent link between unions and rigid work practices -- that's just the way our current dinosaur unions developed. Tony
Post #73,077 by orion 1/6/03 9:41:39 PM Reply	How about we split the difference and pass laws that make it unlawfull for a company to: Force unpaid overtime on employees. Overwork an employee just to try and make them quit. Fire an employee without due cause (Missouri is an At-will state, they can fire us for no reason at all). Fire an employee for following orders of their supervisor. Fire an employee because they have a medical illness and the company does not know how to manage them any more. (This is what I believe happened to me twice) Force an employee to do things not in their job description, or else they get fired. I could think up more, but [link\|http://www.dilbert.com\|The Dilbert Comic Strip] has documented the many many abuses put on IT workers and Engineers. **Pete Moss' Peat Moss, when only the finest horsesht will do! ;)***
Post #73,127 by hnick 1/7/03 7:29:51 AM Reply	Nice thought but unfeasible Salaried overtime has been around so long it would be grandfathered into any new legislation. Overwork is kinda subjective... it's not overwork, it's "stretch goals". At-Will states got that way because corporations bought the proper politicians. If they are honest politicians, they will stay bought, so you would have to buy a suitable crowd to reverse the legislation. Some of the 'honest' ones are probably still in office. This could be difficult. If the original pols were not honest, you have a bidding war against corporate interests. For the corporations, politicians are cheaper in the long run than workers, and somewhat more versatile in that you can use them for a range of things. It would be a terrible precident for management if management was to have to take responsiblilty for their gaffes. Of course they will pass down blame. Work outside of a job description? I can't speak for anybody else, but I LIKE new things. I LIKE today to be different from yesterday. For what they pay me, they are not about to hand me a broom, but if they did, it would be a break from the constant pressure, and I could wander about with my broom picking up on what everybody else is getting into. Hmmm.... doesn't sound too bad for a short term break. And the place is largely carpeted... Never mind... just daydreaming... Sorry, but I don't think andybody else, supernatural or otherwise, is going to come by and make your life wonderful. Your odds are better on the lottery. You have to do it pretty much yourself.
Post #73,346 by orion 1/8/03 7:03:25 AM Reply	Re: Nice thought but unfeasible Equal pay for equal work. If I am forced to work 80 hours a week, I except to at least get a bonus check for it. Not nothing but paid for 40 hours. If I get 39 hours a week due to a sickness or something, I catch unholy heck for it, despite me making the extra hour or hours up the next week for it. Yet they don't even bat an eyebrow at the 50, 60, and 80 hours I do on other weeks for them. Strech goals? More like mismanagement over how long a job should actually take to get done. Managers are always underbidding the hours, and then forcing us to work extra hours to make up for their mistakes. So if they say something should take two weeks to get done, and then they see that it really should have been two months, they force us to work 60 to 80 hours a week in two weeks to get it done. The Pyramid Builders in Egypt had a system like this with whips, you know. At-Will which only goes to show that we have the best government that money can buy. Management always passed down the blame, I've yet to see any manager take responsibility for their own blunders. Better to blame a peon or two and fire them, than admit to making a mistake. IT Workers have become whipping boys/girls. I bet you like doing Data Entry, or moving computers around, or doing QA work, or being forced to do anything but your own job, and then get told that your own job is not getting done, right? That is a trick they use to bring down your productivity in your job description to make it look like you aren't being productive. I am not talking about sweeping floors or scrubbing toliets, but don't give management any ideas. I am not talking about a wonderful life, just a decent one where I get the respect I should get, and I get a job were I am treated fairly. Not those IT Jobs where management considers IT workers to be "A dime a dozen" and can fire many on the spot for no reason at all. **Pete Moss' Peat Moss, when only the finest horsesht will do! ;)***
Post #73,350 by hnick 1/8/03 7:45:22 AM Reply	Oh good, you mostly agree with me >>Equal pay for equal work<< Long hours happen. If it happens a lot without compensation, vote with your feet. >>Strech goals<< Yup. Thats the way it works. See above solution. >>At-Will which only goes to show that we have the best government that money can buy.<< I knew that you understood the American way. >>Management always passed down the blame<< Yup. And union manangement is going to change corporate management? Union managment IS corporate management. >>I bet you like doing ....<< At the end of the day, my job is to get things designed and built. If I have to build a custom environement, that's just part of the job. I've had to do data entry, QA, build machines, move machines, run cables, install power lines because we didn't have 220V lines in the lab, build custom utilites so the QA people can do their jobs, and a lot more. Do what you have to do to get the job done. If it becomes onerous, vote with your feet. >>I am not talking about a wonderful life, just a decent one where I get the respect I should get, and I get a job were I am treated fairly.<< Respect is not something you automatically get. It is earned. Fair treatment is a matter of perspective. If you are more valuable to your employer, the employer would consider it more fair to take care of you in favor of somebody who is immediately replaceable. The employee is not likely to look at things like that. Like I said, perspective and the feet thing. Hugh
Post #73,355 by orion 1/8/03 9:29:35 AM Reply	Vote with your feet? Not in this current job market you cannot vote with your feet unless you still live at home with your folks and can mooch off of them until you find another job. Which may take years, I know of friends who did that and now wish they didn't. One of them has a record three years without a job. Yo see, you shouldn't have to vote with your feet if you had representation or respect. **Pete Moss' Peat Moss, when only the finest horsesht will do! ;)***
Post #73,602 by hnick 1/9/03 7:17:20 AM Reply	Nothing is intolerable until you have a choice. If you literally have no choices, do the best you can with what you have. If you have a choice, vote with feet. Altruists should be viewed with suspicion. Nobody is going to represent you out of the goodness of thier hearts. They are going to want a slice out of an already shrinking pie. This would not likely bode well for you. Nobody is going to give you respect. You have to earn it. Nobody guaranteed you a wonderful life. Just life, since you got it anyway. The rest is up to you. Good luck, Hugh
Post #73,625 by orion 1/9/03 9:23:59 AM Reply	Re: Nothing is intolerable until you have a choice. Trust me, I worked at that stinkhole called a law firm for four and a half years and helped invent a practice area system and did a docket calendar all by myself, etc which saved the company millions. Yet I still did not get one iota of respect for it. I earned bloody repsect, but I didn't get any. Why? Because programmers are "a dime a dozen" these days and easily replaceable once their pay raises have them earning too much and they can be replaced with someone who earns less. How often I wanted to leave, I was looking, but I could never find anything. I was always second or third best for a job placement, but they only wanted one person. In other words I had no choice, no respect, no chance of survival, I got fired and replaced with someone who works cheaper and gives cheaper quality products than I did. The law firm is still trying to get .NET and Office 2000 working since 2001. Does that tell you anything? My reconmendation was to wait until Service Pack 3 to .NET before deploying it, but management wanted to deploy the beta! So now I just sit at home and occasionally talk to an ex-coworker who still works there and find out their progress, which is slower than any other progress they have done. Microsoft has them sold on .Net; however, they cannot seem to convert over to it, or get it to do what they want it to do. **Pete Moss' Peat Moss, when only the finest horsesht will do! ;)***
Post #73,097 by Ashton 1/6/03 10:24:33 PM Reply	Yes, the word Union blinds to - the possibilities in '02+
Post #72,897 by Arkadiy 1/6/03 10:37:22 AM Reply	Re: Is that really your dream? Nonsense. IT is like electricity, or plumbling, or the truck fleet. Does that mean you can't work in accounting and know something about IT? Of course not. Such a person may even hold some administrative authority over his local systems. But the infrastructure of computing is clearly identifiable, requires specific skills, and demands specialized personnel, like a truck fleet or a plumbing system or an electrical power grid. I don't know exactly what you are saying here. Elaborate. :) Now, to answer your question... You're trying to introduce an artificial scarcity, much like Holywood is attempting to do with DRM. If someone is willing to do your job at 1/4 the price, you can have Union mafia beat him up, or you can have INS deport him, but it does not change the basic fact: your job can be done cheaper. So, you have 2 real options: make yourself irreplacable by doing a much better job, or lower your rate. Anything else, including "union", is an attempt to legislate economics. Doesn't work with drugs, with alcohgol, with CDs. Won't work with programmers. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #72,793 by gdaustin 1/5/03 8:12:36 PM Reply	But, Greed is good... I'm kidding, of course. There are greedy bastards in every profession. Can we all agree that man's own wicked/selfish nature causes people in power to exploit those who are weaker or have less or no power? This is an issue of using a large corrupt organization (the union) to deal with other large corrupt organizations (large companies). I don't know the best practical answer. I don't think it is a union. I KNOW the core of this problem is dealing with people who would exploit others for their gain. The problem is that there are a LOT of greedy/corrupt people; that corruption is everywhere, and I only know of one cure. REPENT AND TURN FROM YOUR WICKED WAYS! But how to get this answer into the boardrooms of America? The only way I know of is for all of us to stop buying and using the products of companies who are moving their work positions to India. Open Source anyone? But, where would you buy hardware? Glen Austin
Post #72,753 by tablizer 1/5/03 6:42:58 PM Reply	I disagree. A compromise needed If no qualified employees apply, then you are permitted to accept H1-B applicants. But they manipulate the system. They put skills in there that the target H-1B has, regardless of actual need. The chance of a citizen being an exact fit for a large list of languages and buzzwords is astronomical. The more AND clauses in your WHERE statement the smaller the result set. H1-Bs and unions are a moot point for IT workers. Programming jobs are moving overseas, call centers are moving overseas, mainly because of our failure to make large numbers of software experts available in the U.S. That is bull. Companies just don't want to bother retraining. IBM fires 500 COBOLer's and hires a different set of Java programmers through another door. This is the kind of shit that unions should protect people against. I agree that unions go overboard, but I think some sort of compromise needs to be made. For example, make it illegal for unions to dictate job function (within reason). So, you want my take on this? It is our completely CRAPPY educational system that has created this mess. You are missing the point. The US is becoming a nation of managers. All non-management work is slowly going overseas. Thus, an education system where students goof off and shmooze all day is a good fit for the future of US employment. Since management is mostly a social function, it is harder to export to cheap-labor countries. Thus, the educational system is a better fit than you think. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #72,797 by gdaustin 1/5/03 8:26:59 PM Reply	Re: I disagree. A compromise needed > But they manipulate the system. They put skills in there that the target H-1B has, regardless of actual need. The chance of a citizen being an exact fit for a large list of languages and buzzwords is astronomical. The more AND clauses in your WHERE statement the smaller the result set. > And how many people manipulate their resumes to put in as many buzzwords as possible to make them pass the resume shredder? Then a real person looks at the resume and decides we are lying. > That is bull. Companies just don't want to bother retraining. IBM fires 500 COBOLer's and hires a different set of Java programmers through another door. This is the kind of shit that unions should protect people against. > Your asessment is bull. I've seen the retraining situation actually be WORSE because of union involvement. Union involvement causes management to narrowly define job categories and place all workers into these narrowly defined categories. You're a Level 1 airframe mechanic, and don't you dare touch those avionics! This whole no-retraining thing occurs union or non-union doesn't matter. Companies want to treat people and jobs like cogs, when everyone knows full well that "real life" doesn't work that way. Unions cause companies to treat employees even MORE like cogs, because management can no longer deal with people as "individuals", but must deal with an arbitrary job category of people as "all the same", even though they aren't. > I agree that unions go overboard, but I think some sort of compromise needs to be made. For example, make it illegal for unions to dictate job function (within reason). > Unions must dictate job function in order to properly negotiate wage rates. When you play the "people are cogs" game, you have to play the game completely. If job categories aren't narrowly defined, then wage rates can't be established. > You are missing the point. The US is becoming a nation of managers. All non-management work is slowly going overseas. Thus, an education system where students goof off and shmooze all day is a good fit for the future of US employment. Since management is mostly a social function, it is harder to export to cheap-labor countries. Thus, the educational system is a better fit than you think. > ________________ We are becoming a nation of managers because people in other parts of the world are telling our bosses that they will do our jobs for 1/2, 1/3, or even 1/4 of what we are being paid now. We need to educate our bosses to our value, that someone with a 10 year old computer in India, with a two hour commute each way, and power outages 4 hours a day, with crappy half-ass training in Oracle, CAN'T really do our job. We need to prove to our management that other people are LYING to take our jobs. That is what I saw when I dealt with overseas contractors and I would say that most here would agree with that assessment.
Post #72,859 by bluke 1/6/03 3:58:27 AM Reply	And what if they really can do the job ... as well as you, or, even if they can do the job good enough, then what? The US does not have a monopoly on smart talented individuals. There are talented people all over the world these days, and many of them are willing to work for less money then you are. To say that people abroad are lying to steal your jobs is just not true. I can tell you from personal experience, I worked for 5+ years in IT in the US and now work in IT in Israel, the level of talent here in Israel is not any less then in the US. We work alot with people from India, they are also are pretty talented and have written some good code. To dismiss their talents out of hand is to stick your head in the sand.
Post #72,867 by ben_tilly 1/6/03 8:35:36 AM Reply	One of the major development costs is communication overhead I don't care who you are. If your sleep cycle is off by a half-day from the busy users that you need to get requirements and feedback from, you are going to take longer and take more of that user's time to finish the job than someone halfway competent who is local. Whether this dynamic is a key arbitrator of costs depends on what you're task is. But a lot of companies that try to save costs by exporting IT work overseas only succeed in digging themselves into a money and development pit. Of course this is hardly the only money and develpment pit people dig for themselves. Oddly enough, though, many of the others are also related to communication overhead. See The Mythical Man-Month for a discussion of some of them... Cheers, Ben "Career politicians are inherently untrustworthy; if it spends its life buzzing around the outhouse, it\ufffds probably a fly." - [link\|http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html\|Walter Mead]
Post #72,879 by bluke 1/6/03 10:05:49 AM 1/6/03 10:22:27 AM Reply	Believe me I know ... It is not easy coordinating meetings between Israel (GMT +2), India (GMT +5.5) and California (GMT -8). There is no question that it requires alot of coordination and procedures. However, I have found that if both sides are willing to make the effort not only can it work, but you get the advantages of people working almost around the clock. It clearly also depends on the kind of work that you do. If you are writing user business applications, it makes alot of sense for the development team to be near the users and have alot of interaction with them. My team, does system level/middleware type work which doesn't require nearly as much user interaction. This kind of work can be done in a remote location much easier. Edited by bluke Jan. 6, 2003, 10:22:27 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,973 by ben_tilly 1/6/03 2:47:59 PM Reply	Sounds like we are on the same page then I just think that it is a far bigger issue than most PHBs realize. That said, there are three fundamental issues. The first is the principle of relative advantage. If some kinds of development can be done more easily locally than remotely, and some more easily remotely than locally, then economic theory predicts that we are both better off in the long run by trading - no matter what our relative absolute costs are. The second issue is that that economic theory ignores the inevitable pain of dislocations. While on the whole we are all better, internally on our side there will be winners and losers - and it sucks to be a loser. The third issue is that a large part of the US lifestyle probably is unsustainable long-term. The coming acceptance of this fact is not something to look forward to... Cheers, Ben "Career politicians are inherently untrustworthy; if it spends its life buzzing around the outhouse, it\ufffds probably a fly." - [link\|http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html\|Walter Mead]
Post #73,340 by tablizer 1/8/03 2:27:44 AM Reply	Corporate lying, not individuals And how many people manipulate their resumes to put in as many buzzwords as possible to make them pass the resume shredder? Then a real person looks at the resume and decides we are lying. I am not talking about individuals, I am talking about companies doing this to work around the written intent of the H-1B laws. The law states that they can only hire H-1B's if they cannot find a citizen who fits the requirements. They pull it off by making rigged reqirements. We need to educate our bosses to our value, that someone with a 10 year old computer in India, with a two hour commute each way, and power outages 4 hours a day, with crappy half-ass training in Oracle, CAN'T really do our job. Their next meal depends on doing just that. 2-hour commute each way? Sounds like the 405 LA freeway to me. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #72,800 by broomberg 1/5/03 8:36:30 PM Reply	Your COBOL vs Java example is flawed [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=28368\|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=28368] I need a "best of" (or "worse of", depending on your point of view) post history. That way I'll just pull them out and paste as needed.

Welcome to IWETHEY!