OutsourcingEssay title: OutsourcingOutsourcing to foreign shores, or offshoring, is an idea that has long been in practice, yet meets resistance when American business seeks to send jobs overseas. Sending jobs overseas may help a faltering American business keep their doors open and keep more important jobs open for American workers. Outsourcing has been a business practice for hundreds of years. Adopting legislation to curb Offshoring will limit American businesses competitive edge, one that helps small business thrive and grow, and helps big business to plant an American flag in the international business of offshoring.
Offshoring began in the industrial revolution, with the advent of advances in transportation and communication. America had successfully entered and benefited from the practice of outsourcing to foreign countries. During the Y2K situation and the dot com boom days, outsourcing became a necessity when the US ran short of qualified IT people and turned to outsourcing to India to fill the need.
When the dot com situation came to an end, companies no longer required the same number of people and so eliminated those that were cost prohibitive in the new lower IT budgets that were to become the norm. With more and more companies turning to offshoring as a means of staying competitive, just as many companies were using offshoring as a means of being more efficient.
If America were to discontinue outsourcing to other countries in favor of hiring exclusively American workers, smaller businesses would simply shut down. Small business in America depends on offshoring. Everything from industrial to IT has become affordable due to offshoring. Without offshoring, smaller businesses would shut down and raise the unemployment rate.
Let us dispel some common misconceptions about offshoring. One misconception is that offshoring sends American jobs overseas. The U.S. has lost 2 million jobs due to global trade over the past 20 years but in just 10 years has added 35 million new jobs (Kirkpatrick, David 2004). While American businesses are sending jobs overseas, it does not mean that these jobs are for Americans. Many qualified American white-collar workers would not work at the same salaries offered by smaller or start up companies. Many companies are spending less and less on human resources to stay competitive. A typical salary would start at $50,000; add administrative costs, training and benefits and you are at roughly $78,000, a 56% increase on the original estimate (Gambhir, Satnam 2004). A typical outsourced worker would come in at much less than the original estimate of $50,000
This fallacy is also problematic when applied to foreign companies, as the U.S. has the largest export program in the world ($10.7 trillion in exports to Asia) of any country in the advanced economies. To put it simply the U.S. needs to be doing it more. In countries where a majority of overseas jobs are held by foreign workers the government has little incentive to hire any foreign nationals. Moreover there is a lack of incentive and a lack of confidence in the U.S. authorities to be able to secure the visa-free work permits that make up our visa program.
Given this, it is a necessary condition to meet the U.S. commitment to build an economic and jobs center in a foreign country. And it is also the right condition to meet the U.S. commitment to “build an additional 5 million jobs” by 2020 that would allow U.S. companies to pay into the programs. In other words, the U.S. government is not supporting these companies in the production, marketing and other positions it is providing. It is an impediment, not a cure.
To answer these questions, the United States should immediately take action to build a new foreign-worker visa program, which would give American CEOs, and the president as well as an international workforce to come to the United States and work at the highest level. That is exactly what China, India and Pakistan are doing (Schwartzberg and Williams 2004). If U.S. companies continue to pay those companies more than usual to enter the United States and bring jobs back there won’t be many opportunities for America.
For that reason we should not allow the U.S. government to build a new foreign-worker visa program at the expense of American job creation. In this case the Chinese and Indian companies are making huge investments in America, but they are only investing in American and not in American industries. Thus, they are not taking on new jobs. For China, American jobs are being created at about 1,500 new factories a month over the same period. Because of this job creation, American companies have already created an additional 5 million U.S. job holders in China (Feng, Y. et al. 2008). Moreover, the U.S. government has put much investment in research and development abroad that would have done more to bring American manufacturing down.
We should build on this strategy by expanding its access to international investment. The U.S. has long relied on U.S. investments internationally to improve its competitiveness. Therefore, it must also make the most of its access to foreign investment. Although we have only about 1,100 factories in six of our other 11 centers, we need a more than 1,000 new factories in China each that can pay their fair share of U.S. wages by producing U.S. products (Dietzma and Van Wagoner 1998). We also need more U.S. companies that will invest in China and other emerging economies that are investing in the U.S. This will require greater investment in new factories in China, particularly as China will be the first Asian nation to export to the U.S.. But this investment in new factories will require substantial foreign investment if we want to reduce U.S. economic growth. We should not allow this to happen.
Another misconception is that very few quality businesses are involved in outsourcing. Nothing could be farther from the truth, according to Satnam Gambhir, “In fact, it would be challenging to find a single Fortune 500 company that is not outsourcing any part of its daily business operations to offshore outsourcing firms.” In order to stay competitive in this new business practice, American businesses have to realize that American technology in IT and Telephony and fiber optics directly contributed to the outsourcing boom (Gambhir, Satnam 2004).
The myth that offshoring will increase unemployment can be addressed easily; Employment is on the rise according to Global Insight inc. John A. Challenger writes, “While the practice of outsourcing is thought by many to be a destroyer of jobs, it is likely to create more jobs than it eliminates.” Challenger also states, “The Bureau of Labor Statistics has estimated that total employment is likely to increase from 144 million jobs in 2002 to 165 million in 2012, largely as a result of outsourcing.” Challenger also states, “A growing number of economists agree that outsourcing contributes to increased productivity and helps keep inflation in check.”
Another misconception, that America does not insource, that we only outsource, is also very untrue. The number of jobs insourced is growing at a faster rate than jobs lost overseas. (Kane, Schafer and Frasier 2004) Not only are better jobs insourced, but also new jobs are being created. John A. Challenger has suggested “Offshore Outsourcing Coordinator” “…This person may also be in charge of assisting workers whose jobs have been dissolved or moved abroad.”
There have been rallying cries for the legislation of offshoring. There is legislation that is being written to limit offshoring or to encourage companies to keep as much work within the country as possible (Kakumanu and Potinova 2006). Over 35 states have introduced bills that would affect companies looking to outsource or already outsourcing (Mozumder) (Kakumanu and Potinova 2006)
American business needs to be strong