FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Outsourcing Still Affects Us: This and AI Worker Displacement Need Not be Inevitable

My uncle, who’s now in his early sixties, has been working at Verizon New England for decades. He was there when it was New England Telephone and for Bell Atlantic’s purchase in 2000, when the name changed to Verizon.

Throughout the years, he’s seen his peers laid off in the dozens. In his department, he is now literally the last employee working in the United States. The rest are employed in India, saving the company billions, where they receive incomparably lower salaries.

Healthy and able-bodied, he is in no mood to retire. However, as there was every indication that his position would soon be transferred to India, when he was offered an early retirement package, he reluctantly took it. His last day is in mid-spring.

Cheerleaders of the globalized economy claim that outsourcing does not happen too much anymore; rather, it is artificial intelligence that is the main threat to labor – and this tends be couched in the inevitable forward march of ‘progress’.

Yet, this past fall, a dozen people were also laid off where I work, as their jobs shifted to India. These were just a few of the 14 million American jobs overseas in recent years. As my now-former coworkers were all remote employees in California, it was easier for our supervisor to let them go from our Massachusetts headquarters; they didn’t have to see the sordid expressions of those laid off.

Both department vice president and manager were on the call when the job cuts were explained to us who remained. The latter told us that this was the trend in our department (very encouraging, I must say) of transitioning more work to vendors – in other words, outsourcing to emerging economies where labor is far cheaper. He went onto say that laid off employees would receive some short-term benefits and career counseling. In actuality, this meant that those laid off would be financially secure for about three months and be offered generic advice for finding a new job. Then, bye-bye forever.

In these situations, it is easy to blame one’s boss and – for some – people in India or other developing countries where offshored jobs land. In the case of the boss, he or she is just doing what the company CEO, top tier executives, board of directors and majority shareholders want – greater profits for the company at the expense of workers. But even they are just acting as other companies do, as they compete in the global marketplace.

For those who blame workers in developing countries, this convenient rebuke, bordering on racism, is all too easy. They miss the real culprit of government policy and decisions made by top-tier executives – both crafted within the United States. Just like Americans, people in developing countries take the best employment opportunity they can. Often, thanks to Western offshoring, it is under multinationals that offer slightly more attractive salaries than locally-based companies, while paying far less than in developed countries.

Rather than racialized hatred, both developed and developing economy workers are at the behest of MNCs’ leisurely skating around the frictionless ice-rink-world in search of the most inexpensive labor that ensures exorbitant profit. Already, the jobs that American workers lost to the Chinese may have left China for cheaper labor in Vietnam, Bangladesh and Cambodia. In a state of mutual precarity, international worker solidarity makes far more sense than racialized disdain for the overseas worker.

The mass media tends to frame job loss to outsourcing and AI as an inevitability. Yet, these are the result of government policy decisions that could easily be reversed if there was a will to ameliorate the condition of the worker, and, consequently, help convalesce related problems, such as lower lifespans, higher rates of opioid abuse and suicide.

A quick and easy solution would be to develop a tax penalty to deter outsourcing and a mandate that AI-related job loss require employers offer an equally-paying job. Such would go a long way to protecting the American worker.

It would not dispose of capitalism nor yield a red tide. It would simply help insulate the democratic citizen from rampant job displacement. And why would the democratic citizen expect any less protection from a government that they elected and supposedly works for them?

More articles by:
bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
January 21, 2020
Sheldon Richman
Warmonger Cotton Accuses Antiwar Think Tank of Anti-Semitism
John Feffer
Trump Makes Space Great Again
Patrick Cockburn
The US and Iran’s Perpetual Almost-War is Unsustainable – and Will End Badly
James C. Nelson
Another Date That Will Live in Infamy: 10 Years After Citizens United
Robert Fisk
Iran Will be Changed Forever by Admitting Its Great Mistake, Unlike the West Which Ignores Its Own Misdeeds
Dean Baker
Did Shareholders’ Benefit by Paying Boeing’s Fired CEO $62 Million?
Susan Roberts
The Demise of the Labour Party and the Future For UK Socialism
Binoy Kampmark
Janus-Faced on Climate Change: Microsoft’s Carbon Vision
David Levin
The Teamster Revolt Against the Hoffa Era
Victor Grossman
Defender and Spearheads
Russell Mokhiber
BS Public Editor and the Disease of Contempt
Tiffany Muller
Get the Money Out of Politics: 10 Years After Citizens United
Laura Flanders
Iowa is Not the Twitterverse
Graham Peebles
Education: Expanding Purpose
Elliot Sperber
Handball in Brooklyn 
January 20, 2020
Paul Street
Trump Showed Us Who He Was Before He Became President
Eric Mann
Martin Luther King and the Black Revolutionary Tradition
Ipek S. Burnett
MLK and the Ghost of an Untrue Dream
Mark Harris
Better Living Through Glyphosate? Spray Now, Ask Questions Later
Katie Fite
Owyhee Initiative Wilderness and Public Lands Deal Critique: Ten Years After
Thomas Knapp
A Loophole for the Lawless: “Qualified Immunity” Must Go
REZA FIYOUZAT
Best Enemies Forever: The Iran-U.S. Kabuki Show
Jeff Mackler
Worldwide Furor Sparked by U.S. Assassination of Iran’s General Suleimani
William deBuys
The Humanitarian and Environmental Disaster of Trump’s Border Wall
Binoy Kampmark
A Matter of Quality: Air Pollution, Tennis and Sporting Officialdom
James Haught
GOP Albatross
Jill Richardson
Why Do We Have School Lunch Debt at All?
Robert Koehler
Nuclear Hubris
Patrick T. Hiller
Instead of Real-Time Commentary, Eight Common-Sense Reason for Not Going to War with Iran
Charles Andrews
A Note on Carlos Ghosn and Global Capitalism
Jeffrey St. Clair
Some Trees: Los Angeles
Weekend Edition
January 17, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: No Woman, No Cry
Kathleen Wallace
Hijacking the Struggles of Others, Elizabeth Warren Style
Robert Hunziker
The Rumbling Methane Enigma
Frank Joyce
Will the Constitution Fail Again?
Andrew Levine
Biden Daze
Pete Dolack
Claims that the ‘NAFTA 2’ Agreement is Better are a Macabre Joke
Vijay Prashad
Not an Inch: Indian Students Stand Against the Far Right
Ramzy Baroud
Sealed Off and Forgotten: What You Should Know about Israel’s ‘Firing Zones’ in the West Bank
Norman Solomon
Not Bernie, Us. Not Warren, Us. Their Clash Underscores the Need for Grassroots Wisdom
Ted Rall
America’s Long History of Meddling in Russia
David Rosen
The Irregulators vs. FCC: the Trial Begins
Jennifer Matsui
The Krown
Joseph Natoli
Resolutions and Obstacles/2020
Sarah Anderson
War Profiteering is Real
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail