| Big Business Using Digital "Illegal
Immigrants" to Smuggle out Millions of US Jobs, Calling it
Outsourcing
By Rob Kall
OpEdNews.Com
The outsourcing of Tech Jobs to India and China is one of the biggest
threats to the US job economy. India is complaining about violating the
spirit of free trade. But I see this massive assault on US jobs as either
a failure or intentional choice of the Bush administration not to respond
to a technological development that allows "wetback" workers to
go digital, smuggling prime value American jobs without having to sneak
across the border.
It used to be, if you wanted to hire a foreign worker, you had to apply
to the immigration department to get a temporary work visa for this
potential employee. Digital outsourcing has become a way that big business
routine evades the process, so they can smuggle foreign labor (not
laborers) into the US.
Eleven years ago, I discovered a a doctoral level biomedical
engineer/programmer in Siberia who'd developed published articles
about unique software for biofeedback, unlike anything developed in the
US. He wanted to work for my company, to develop a new kind of software
unavailable anywhere in the world. I had to go through a major process,
proving to the immigration department that I could not source a programmer
in the US to do what he was doing. I had to provide the specifications for
the job and then they immigration department put it out to see if they
could find someone who could do the work. They found a few potential
candidates who weren't even close. Only after that exercise was I
able to arrange a temporary work visa for this unique programmer.
But now, with the internet and satellite aided phone connections, it's
possible to circumvent the immigration department and smuggle work to
foreign workers, even though there are millions of Americans who can do
the job.
We talk about the problems with illegal immigration. But over the last
few years, technology has enabled corporations to hire foreign workers
without having to deal with the immigration department. This is either a
failure of the administration to respond to a new development in
technology or a conscious choice by the administration to allow
transnational and megacorporations to cut their costs by using labor from
other countries.
The way I see it, using phone or internet lines to enable a worker in
China or India to answer a phone call from a US location is virtually,
digitally crossing a border, using a worker who doesn't have a green card,
ie., breaking the law, just like hiring a maid without working papers
might be considered illegal.
It should not be allowed to stand as is. If it is not a blatant
violation of the immigration laws, then it is the use of a loophole that
ought to be closed and closed fast.
Last year, it was predicted that the outsourcing business would grow
five fold in the next few years, from about $11 billion a year up past $50
billion. Keep in mind that that $50 billion in pay to third world workers
represents a loss of US jobs worth $44 billion now and $200 billion
soon. Those are American jobs racing to India, China and the
Caribbean. Interestingly, I learned about the growth of outsourcing
accidentally, while researching a major electronic voting firm that
had branched out. That voting firm had been involved in several shady
elections where the democratic candidate predicted to win by the polls had
been surprisingly beaten by Republican candidates. Perhaps that partially
explains why this breach in the walls of immigration policy has
"slipped past" the recognition of the Bush administration.
This issue and this problem will not go away. The Indian
government has attacked
the US plan to ban outsourcing according to the Financial Times,
"arguing it is a protectionist measure contrary to the spirit of free
trade."
This is in response to the passage by the US senate of a bill that bans
the outsourcing of federal work. The senate bill is a good beginning, but
it does not go far enough. It should either ban or charge large tariffs
(as Thom Hartmann suggested in a conversation) on outsourcing using phone
or internet or other electronic means altogether, or, rather, change the
immigration laws-- take them into the digital era-- so this kind of
electronic outsourcing is labeled as a violation of immigration
laws. And Hartmann points out that even if we did pass legislation that
banned outsourcing, companies could circumvent the laws by creating
offshore corporations that would "sell" finished
"products" to companies in the US.
Another problem is that tariffs are verboten in the world of WTO and
NAFTA. There's no doubt that India will apply to the WTO for billions in
damages if the senate bill is passed forbidding outsourcing of federal
jobs. And the likelihood of a successful pursuit of damages would be even
greater if a tariff were established. We need to pull out of the WTO and
NAFTA or demand that they exclude outsourced labor.
On top of that, the Indian government plans to tax these transnational
corporations, like GE and Morgan Stanley. That will be ironic. These
"traitor" companies register "chimera" corporations in
the Bahamas (60 minutes just covered this, using Haliburton as an example)
that avoid US taxes. And now, the taxes may end up being collected by
India for work done in response to phone calls dialed to US phone numbers,
processing data generated in the US.
William Rivers Pitt, in an article published in truthout.org
, reporting on the Iowa caucus campaign, described and recapped a
stump speech by Dennis Kucinich:
“We’ve had three million manufacturing jobs
lost,” he said, “since July of 2000. Three million. ... job
loss... is not just a statistic. It means a home that is threatened.
It means someone in the family is not going to get the education they
hoped for. It means the loss of health benefits. It means retirement
benefits at risk. It means instability in a family. It could mean a family
splitting up. Tremendous economic pressures are being put on so many
American families today, and I’ll tell you one of the reasons.”
“Ten years ago,” he said in a
rising voice, “the United States passed agreements called NAFTA and the
WTO which created conditions where global corporations are setting all the
rules for trade. You know what it is about? You know what it is about. It
is about cheap labor. Wherever they can drive down wages, they do it.
Wherever they can get someone to do a job for less than nothing, that’s
what they are looking for. They don’t care about child labor, prison
labor, slave labor, they don’t care about crushing workers. What they
care about is being able to make more and more of a profit. They don’t
care if they close down a community.”
“They don’t care if they crush
small businesses,” he said, now in full roar. “They don’t care
because they have the power, with NAFTA and the WTO, and all these trade
agreements, to just move jobs out of this country, move out the
manufacturing jobs, move out high-tech jobs, move out any kind of job that
exists in this country that they can make a better buck off in another
country by crushing workers rights. I’ve seen it. It is time to put an
end to it.”
The thunder of the audience shook the
room."
It is obvious when a major industries is destroyed by slave wage or
government subsidized competition, as was the case with the clothing, show
and steel industries. But now, we have an even more insidious form of the
search for the cheapest labor that Kucinich talks about. It may take
withdrawing from, canceling the USA's connection to the WTO and NAFTA
agreements to plug the hole to stop the flood of lost jobs. Only Dennis
Kucinich is currently calling for this. We need leaders who can see that
we need to either get rid of the WTO and NAFTA or drastically change the
rules.
Bottom line, there is a gaping hole in US policy that can easily be
plugged or at least made smaller by tariffs. If the Bush administration
and the Republican controlled congress fail to do so, we know where the
good, high paying jobs in the US will continue to go, as they dry up here.
We know that it will be a massive multibillion dollar giveaway to big
business by the Bush administration and it's lock-step supporters in
congress. It's no wonder that GE, owner of NBC, probably the most
conservative (read that pro-Bush, biased against democrats, greens and
progressives) of the networks, is at the forefront of outsourcing. (I'd
mistakenly stated that GE owns CBS, but CBS is owned by Viacom.)
The answers: you can tell your senator and congressman that just
blocking outsourcing of federal jobs is not enough. The democratic
candidates can raise this as an issue, that it is the failure of the Bush
administration and the Republican party to protect some of the most
valuable US jobs. This is an issue that people should be able to
understand. More important, it may force them to at least respond more
aggressively to close the massive leak they've allowed to cause so much
damage to the US job market.
Rob
Kall rob@opednews.com is
editor/founder of OpEdNews.com,
president of Futurehealth, Inc. and organizer of the Futurehealth Winter
Brain, Optimal Functioning and StoryCon Meeting.
This article is copyright Rob Kall and originally published by opednews.com
but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog or web
media so long as this credit paragraph is attached. You can find over
85 more articles written by Rob Kall here.
|