Offshoring comes under bipartisan attack in Congress

[Newsjock]

Source: Computerworld

Four U.S. lawmakers -- three Democrats and one Republican -- have teamed up to attack call center outsourcing by introducing a bill that would penalize any company that moves a call center overseas.

The bill would make any company that moves a call center offshore ineligible for any federal grants or loans. It would require the U.S. Labor Department to maintain a list of employers who relocate a call center overseas and force companies to provide at least 120 days' notice before doing so.

It would also require a call center worker to disclose his or hers location at the beginning of the call, if the caller request it.

The U.S. Call Center and Consumer Protection Act (HR 3596), was introduced by U.S. Rep. Timothy Bishop (D-N.Y.) and announced at news conference that included representatives of the Communication Workers of America. The measure's co-sponsors include David McKinley (R-W.V.), Gene Green (D-Texas), and Michael Michaud (D-Maine).

Read more: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9222561/Offshoring_comes_under_bipartisan_attack_in_Congress

[marasinghe]

1. a start. but can we up the outrage a bit higher on the salary scale, as well, congress people? n/t

[StarsInHerHair]

2. I think they SHOULD NOT get Federal loans or grants-they do now? Negative

Right is here, directly, informing call centers of what they CANT do

[JDPriestly]

3. This is a bit too late.

What about all the companies that have already outsourced their call centers?

Would they also be ineligible for federal grants or loans?

Why not make them ineligible for tax breaks and other subsidies also?

[Skittles]

10. yup

the usual dog and pony show from our corporate government

[harun]

22. A lot late

[KT2000]

4. what about manufacturing

this looks like politicians are irritated by the off-shore call centers and missing the destruction of the middle class manufacturing jobs.

[jtuck004]

5. I'm not sure but that they should get a credit if they DO move them offshore.

They should be prohibited from moving any engineering, manufacturing, finance, accounting, any job that pays, say, > $40,000 a year.

They should get tax credits for offering public classes at no cost to student in the disciplines that are important to the high paying jobs in their business, credits for people they train that are hired at >$40K (none for less) there or elsewhere, credits for people who start a business as a result of their training, credits for every employee they are able to train or educate that leaves the call center for a job that pays three times as much, etc.

Spending our resources insuring the existence of $10-$12/hr jobs to keep the working poor in servitude to the payday lenders and banks is cruel and unusual punishment and does not bode well for our future. Call center jobs don't leave most people with enough disposable income to have much in the way of opportunity, nor to pay taxes that keep schools, fire departments, etc going. While such jobs may have been a stepping stone in the past, when we could expect growth, that may not be true any longer.

Investing our resources in making sure people have plenty of opportunity and support will be the only way out of this hole. (Could we amp up the WIA to do more outreach, maybe more in helping people figure out larger coops? Maybe a CETA redone for this era?).

If the call center jobs go away I am pretty sure most people would be just as well off working at a local food/farm coop or Goodwill store, or maybe we could provide state resources to facilitate small groups in starting employee-owned business in areas where business is not investing...

[Citizen Worker]

6. And what about the millions of manufacturing jobs? This is just more theatre. Instead we should be

renegotiating the slave trade agreements to protect workers and the environment as enforceable remedies. Stop the grandstanding!

[Bogart]

7. Perhaps these "Four U.S. lawmakers" should refrain from making laws that force businesses to choose

between leaving the country or going out of business.

[bread_and_roses]

8. and just exactly what laws would those be? Labor laws? Health and Safety? Environmental laws?

Just which laws "force businesses to choose between leaving the country or going out of business?"

Do you mean those terrible laws that allow profitable corporations to end up paying no taxes and somehow increase profits while keeping wages flat for - oh, something like thirty years? Or those terrible minimum wage laws? Health and Safety laws? Just which laws are you talking about?

[Bogart]

9. One of many examples (this fight to save jobs is also bipartisan)

The Chamber applauds yesterday’s introduction of H.R. 2681, the “Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act of 2011” by Reps. John Sullivan (R-OK) and Mike Ross (D-AR), along with a bipartisan group of eight House cosponsors...

Altogether, PCA estimates that as many as 4,000 jobs in the cement industry could be lost due to new EPA regulations on their sector. In addition to Cement MACT, the industry is reeling from six other proposed or recently finalized EPA regulations, ranging from fly ash disposal to greenhouse gases to Clean Air Act standards of performance. I urge you to read PCA’s economic study to understand just how serious this problem has become. http://www.chamberpost.com/2011/07/help-the-cement-industry-from-being-regulated-out-of-business/

Most rational people understand that workers and the environment must be protected. Unfortunately, bureaucrats are only interested in protecting themselves and growing their power. Regulations create jobs for bureaucrats; thus, in their corrupt world view, everything must be regulated, re-regulated, subjugated and vanquished.

Regulating Small Businesses Out of Business
By Blanche Lincoln
former Democratic senator from Arkansas, National Chair, Small Businesses for Sensible Regulations

As officials in Washington continue to pen new regulation, frustration among small business owners across the country has grown. The high tensions have created a rift between regulators and the public, largely leaving commonsense in the lurch...We need to restore sensibility, transparency and balance to the system. Over the past five years, the number of proposed “major regulations” – those costing $100 million or more to the economy – have increased by more than 60 percent. Today, there are over 160,000 pages of federal regulations on the books, and more...

[bread_and_roses]

12. sorry, this is RW nonsense

Blanche Lincoln? ROFL. In Corporate Speak, "sensible" translates to "let us poison the earth and kill workers to make more profit." Read the environmental news much? Read Labor news much? Economic news? "Regulations create jobs for bureaucrats" - ? What about protecting the air, water, workers health, etc? If anything, the regulations are too weak, too friendly to polluters and exploiters, inadequately enforced, and carry insufficient penalties.

[Bogart]

14. "...regulations are too weak, too friendly to polluters and exploiters, inadequately enforced,..."

Actually, it's bipartisan "nonsense." But what the heck, you are the expert--you know exactly how to create jobs in other countries. So, stop complaining about the effects of your policies--they are working as intended.

[JoeyT]

15. Oh bullshit.

EPA regs aren't what sent jobs overseas. Cheap labor and the ability to abuse workers is. The ability to poison everything around them with no consequence is a consideration, but it isn't the only one. It isn't like there are any serious consequences when they do it here.

Those damned minimum wage laws, insisting employees should be able to afford food. And OSHA! Insisting that employees should have a right to not have their lives endangered on a daily basis for pennies. Stupid EPA, insisting we shouldn't be able to poison municipal water supplies because we're too cheap or lazy to dispose of waste properly. All job killing regulation!

Right wingers would be funny if they weren't so sad.

[joeglow3]

16. EPA Regs DO have that effect

Now, I am not saying that I agree with the above poster, but the fact remains that EPA regs DO cause jobs to go overseas. After all, why would a company spend millions complying with common sense rules when they can cross the US border and rape the land for free?

I think the loss of jobs is a unintended necessity and we should continue to push other countries to adopt similar rules, to pretend like it has NO impact is sticking your head in the sand.

[No Elephants]

27. Companies will do whatever increases their profits, even if it kills us.

The question is, what will OUR government do about it?

Give them money and tax breaks for offshoring, or take a different course?

eta: It's not the only question. The other question is what will WE do about it? Put pressure on government and buy things made in the U.S., if we possibly can, or take a different course?

[Bogart]

23. What are you so angry about? You're winning. Aside from that it makes you sound like a right-winger.

Then again, there are a lot of people from both sides of the spectrum who are unemployed and they are angry about it.

The left and the right also agree on something at the moment--the American economy is in bad shape. Thus, in the view of the unemployed, and working people in general, it doesn't make sense that some in the government are actually trying to make things worse. By EPA's own 2011 estimates, their new regulations will cost industry $37 billion, 6.3 million paperwork burden hours, and 60,100 jobs.

Now, the EPA is going after farmers and ranchers--threatening to fine them for moving cattle, tilling a field or even driving down a dirt road, if they stir up to much dust.

With 9% unemployment and 2% economic growth, is this level of regulation appropriate today?

You are not just hurting the right, my friend. If you recall, labor unions were for the pipeline that was recently regulated out of reality. But right-wingers need jobs too. Perhaps if they were employed, they wouldn't be so angry all the time.

Here is what another one of "your right-wingers" has to say about it.

We need to avoid the regulatory uncertainty that has slowed investment and job creation over the last three years. Measures that threaten the balance of supply and demand, and the cost, of our electricity do just that. The administration should take these significant concerns into consideration before going forward with the rule by the end of the year. EPA should ensure that, at minimum, the rule is revised to provide adequate time for cost-effective compliance in ways that do not threaten the reliability of… electricity. - Evan Bayh D, former U.S. Senator from Indiana

[No Elephants]

28. The poster of Reply 15 did not sound like a right winger at all to me!

[socialist_n_TN]

17. Then maybe the government should offer DIRECT support

like they do to the capitalists to worker owned co-ops here in this country.

[Bogart]

24. It case you haven't noticed, the government doesn't have any money...

I know, I know...all we have to do, is tax the rich, all of our problems would be solved.

[No Elephants]

25. LOL!

[underpants]

11. Walgreens is outsourcing its billing (and some accounting) effective Jan 1

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-01-08/news/28385414_1_genpact-ceo-pramod-bhasin-walgreens

[tawadi]

13. Too little, too late. And long overdue. eom

[Gman]

18. Now there's a bill that's deader than fried chicken upon arrival.

LOL! Well intentioned, nevertheless.

[Romulox]

19. Toyota is the most popular nameplate in America; what's so special about call center jobs?

:shrug:

[No Elephants]

26. All jobs are special. But some foreign companies make stuff here. Trick is to find

out what is made where--and to what extent.

And, finding out can be a trick. This site may help. http://www.madeinusa.org/

I do not know all that much about it, but it seems to be at least a place to start?

ETA: In case it's not obvious, I agree with you that I don't see a reason to single out call center jobs. I am sure there is a reason why they did, but it is not apparent to me.

[w4rma]

20. Good. Hurry up. (nt)

[Dover]

21. This is good. But I hoped this article was going to be about offshore financial/tax havens...

ah well...

[wordpix]

31. gawd forbid we should step on Rich Mitt's toes

[DCBob]

29. Why the focus on call centers?

These are relatively low paying boring jobs. I think a bigger issue is the massive numbers of foreign workers on H1-b visas that take high paying technology jobs away from American citizens.

[wordpix]

30. but it's OK for Rich Mitt to offshore investments so his clients can access tax havens?

:shrug:

[0rganism]

32. weak start -- how about requiring all US military equipment be made in the US?

Sure, a lot of our military's weapons are at least assembled here, but we could get a lot of jobs back by requiring that all parts for the weapons and vehicles, all uniforms, all flags, etc. be made in the USA.

After that gets resolved, we can start talking about sensible tariffs on the rest of our imports.