|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | Re: GISList: New outsourcing laws.... |
| Date: |
02/26/2003 01:31:59 AM |
| From: |
GISex* Technologies |
|
|
---------Included Message----------
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:25:39 -0500
From: "Anthony Quartararo" <ajq3@spatialnetworks.com>
Reply-To: <ajq3@spatialnetworks.com>
To: <gislist@geocomm.com>
Subject: GISList: New outsourcing laws....
Cameron,
Do you know what the loaded hourly rate is for an experienced,
professional
photogrammetrist, or a mid-level software engineer in the US/Canada is
?
There are several sources for GIS industry salary surveys on the
market.
This new law really only applies to government contracts (the
government
would not want to attempt to limit business-business transactions). How
wouldn't hiring more government contractors [ anti-capitalistic measures
]
require the need for more taxes? Governments get their funds from taxes.
The
ability of any given government to procure new services, short of
"free",
means that it has to spend money from some budget, and if that has not
been
forecasted by collection of taxes, then either one of two things will
happen, something else will be sacrificed to pay for those GIS
contracts, or
new taxes will be levied. I would challenge anyone to point out a
government
GIS organization that truly pays for itself [that is, all-in costs, no
subsidies from "G&A"]. Adding more workers (whether government employees
to
handle the work load internally or outsourcing them to US-based
workers)
costs a ton of money. I seriously doubt any politician is going to
propose
cutting Medicaid so more ArcInfo licenses can be sold in New Jersey to
sit
more rear-ends in chairs for 8 hours a day [oh, and don't forget the 2
15
minute breaks, 30 minutes of lunch, 1.5X in benefits costs, 10 days of
vacation, sick leave, moving costs, maternity leave, paternity leave,
ADA
costs, wage classifications, 401K administration costs, training costs,
turnover costs, etc. etc. etc.] Add on the slim "profits" that
government
contractors have to negotiate with their "clients", pad a few extra
misc.
costs here and there, and shazaam, who's got money to pay for that in
these
current times? Duct tape and plastic sheeting frenzy aside, government
organizations should be the ones initiating repeal of "buy America"
clauses
in their contracts, at least for our industry, not the other way around.
It is not un-American to outsource overseas. In fact, I will argue it
is
absolutely the smart thing to do in the right situation. More profit
achieved by outsourcing would allow hiring more people domestically to
grow
a business using hard-earned cash, not some lethal arrangement with a
VC.
How many import cars are driven here in the US, how many computers are
made
outside the US, there is a reason for that. Living in reality (in
business
terms) means not relying on "credit" to make payroll. American culture
thrives on the "whimpy" syndrome which is, "I'll pay you Tuesday for a
hamburger today...". This has contributed more to our economic problem
than
outsourcing ever has. It is harder and harder, in our industry at least,
to
earn a profit, any profit, or work done in the US for US clients. I
honestly
don't think the politicians who initiated this legislation really have
a
grasp of what it is going to cost them. No smart business would take
this
strategy when presented with two viable options, the less expensive
option
is always chosen. Further to my point, we could take the non-outsourcing
to
the extreme with a real recent example, although not entirely spot on.
The
"new" new Department of Homeland Scrutiny (Security) has taken the bold
and
blundering step of trying to become all things to all people, and with
170,000+ employees under his belt, you think Tom Ridge is going to get
real
value for his buck out of each and every employee? Sure, we're not going
to
outsource such important and strategic policies as "Duct Tape and
Plastic
Sheeting" to foreigners, we can think of that one all by ourselves. How
much
did it cost for that white paper ?
Lastly, I think it is rather insulting to the American sense of
innovation
and ingenuity to force governments to contract with only American-made
contractors. That is to say, the government is implying that a) the
economy
will not bounce back before such anti-capitalistic measures actually
have an
impact [if any] and b) Americans will not find some new market to
develop
that will be uniquely American that will start employing so many people
out
of work, and c) punishing companies that outsource overseas instead of
holding the Ken Lay's of the world accountable, along with all those
that
bought Amazon.com stock at $400 a share in 1999 is to entirely ignore
Darwinian theory. Americans can and will find new industries to
dominate,
much as we have done since the industrial revolution. Also, the economy
will
bounce back,
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
