275 jobs, $8 an hour
Last month, the Fort Worth-based company announced that it would close its Clintwood call center by the end of this year. In the future, it will route more calls through India. About 275 employees will lose jobs paying $8 an hour and higher, plus benefits, pushing double-digit unemployment up a few more notches.
You are telling me that you cannot pay a measly $8 an hour plus benefits? When I was working security, I got paid $7 an hour, NO benefits. Shame that these people were making only a buck more than I was. They probably should have been paid more, but no... send the jobs to India... pay them $.50 on the dollar.
I'm glad that little town is trying to bear it with a grin. The problem is that this is a mass problem. The Cons, and tne Neo Cons sitting tight in their money will tell you "But this is good for the US! Free Market! Sucks to be you! Buggy Whip Bullshit! Innovate! Do something new!"
Easy to say when you've got turkey with all the fixin's on your plate while some of us need to go to Aldi or browse the $.99 menu at Wendy's.
I travel a bit. Travelocity lost money last year? Good, I hope they go out of business. They lost money because of the scare tactics of the Bush Administration and people not wanting to fly anymore. Everything has has a trickle down, domino effect. Scare the American people... companies put off plans for projects that require more hirings, make due with what they have. Make a fake war, take away a lot of people from their families and jobs, not knowing when they really can come back. Defer their un-enlistments. More reasons for companies to not invest in their businesses at home... the world remains to volatile.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Tom
It does suck that they can't afford to pay these loyal hard working people the $8 an hour.
But, if they continue to lose money, more than just the 275 employees in Virgina are screwed.
That having been said, I think that instead of laying off the people who make the company work, they should fire the incompotent (and probably impotent) CEOs who don't know the difference between a business plan and their bungholes.
2 - Ms. Tek
Wow... the first halfway intelligent thing that I have heard from the other side in a while.
Perhaps more of the CEO's need to do some real work and research intstead of sitting on their asses, collecting checks, cutting employees when it looks like they aren't going to make bonus that year!
3 - Chris Kent
I'm glad that little town is trying to bear it with a grin.
I'm glad someone finally sees Fort Worth for what it really is!
And to the next person that tells me "Well the Indians need to eat too"- Go screw yourself.
Whenever someone uses the word "eat" and "screw" in the same sentence, well hell, it's going to get attention.
Ms. Tek, there's a lot of fire here and it feels partially genuine. It's a rollercoaster ride of a blog - watch out for the flying skeleton! - but you make a great point.
4 - Craig Lyndall
"Wow... the first halfway intelligent thing that I have heard from the other side in a while."
Seriously after a post that is about 90% emotion, how can you judge arguments from the other side for their intelligence?
5 - Ms. Tek
Wow Craig, since when is blogging about acting like a damn Vulcan? Emotions are just as valid. What facts about lack of jobs in the US would you like to know?
Better yet, since all my posts in your eyes are "emotional", why don't you let your fingers do the walking and google American jobs for yourself. Make sure you make a point to read some of the facts from the non-GO GO MONEY side.
*rolls eyes*
Wow, the French Revolution looks better all the time... all those guillotines and rolling heads... I wonder if it made a satisfying "thunk" as it disposed of the likes of Marie Antoinette?
6 - Chris Kent
Ms. Tek is giving the proverbial finger to Travelocity....it's an editorial that plays like a Minor Threat punk song - add drums, bass, a microphone....it's not bad....
7 - Craig Lyndall
Ms. Tek has been pretty critical of the whole job offshoring/outsourcing for a while. I understand the reaction but it doesn't make the argument any more valid because people are pissed. Sorry. It just doesn't.
It's like yesterday, people were happy in the state of Ohio because they have started legislation so that drivers could lose their license if they steal gasoline from gas stations. If you pump and then drive away, you could lose your license for up to 90 days. So, then they interview a bunch of people who say things like "well it sounds like a good idea." "I think it's good because it might keep gas prices lower." etc.
It's all crap. It's another example of people just forming opinions and then coming to conclusions that seem obvious at first, but aren't so clear cut.
First of all, it is a waste of time. A gas station can simply make customers pre-pay.
For another thing, I am quite positive the amount of people who steal gas has no discernible effect on gas prices because it happens at such a low rate if you were to take statistics.
Either way, these people go on a gut reaction to come up with their opinion. Same thing with the offshoring situation. You can't look at issues through emotion-twinged glasses and expect to come up with rational conclusions most of the time.
8 - Ms. Tek
Excuse me
Could you have been any less pompous and condescending with your reply?
You just said that I cannot make an informed decision about offshoring because I am too emotionally attached?
So the CEOs who are not losing their jobs are the ones who are really making the informed decisions?
Also, what argument am I trying to win in my blog? I said that I will no longer give money to travelocity because they are going to route more calls through India.
Guess what.
If they were just laying off people, fine... I would still spend money just to help them. It's part of the reason why I try to fly United all the time. I give them money because I think they need it and I want to help them out after 9/11.
For travelocity to say that they are laying off people in the US and route more through India is not a business practice I agree with. Therefore I will show it with my money.
Craig, you can keep spending with them all you want... But for you to insult my intelligence or my actions because you think I don't have a grasp on the situation is pompous and only makes you look like a pretentious ass. Because I don't have the same opinion or conclusion as you doesn't make it any less valid.
Here, accpet this golden ticket to the "go screw yourself" line. It will allow you to jump to head of the line.
Don't say I never did anything for ya!
9 - Chris Kent
Craig,
Do you agree with offshoring/outsourcing? Do you think it's a good practice? Do you actually disagree with Ms. Tek's point? She doesn't support every single paragraph, but she is definitely angry about people in America losing their jobs. Shouldn't we all be?
10 - Mark Saleski
no, we're supposed to be happy about it.
it's good for us.
honest.
i read it somewhere....
;-)
11 - Chris Kent
Well Mark, you're being sarcastic and funny. But rather than make fun of people attempting a serious conversation, why aren't we discussing the topic?
That was what I was trying to get at.....
12 - Craig Lyndall
All you did was attack me. You said I came off sounding pompous. Fine.
There are plenty of people who think offshoring is the only way for companies to compete in a global economy. If they don't compete and lose out to other companies we could lose even more jobs in the long run.
I am saying an emotional knee-jerk response as you have often displayed is not the best way to look at an issue. You can attack travelocity all you want, but maybe them competing and staying open will save more high paying jobs than if they were to continue paying the $8 an hour. I don't know. All I am saying is neither do you.
13 - Dustin James
Tom Friedman of the NY Times has an interesting Op/Ed today that applies to this post titled "The Great Indian Dream" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/11/opinion/11FRIE.html?th
Presents the "other" side.
14 - Mark Saleski
i have yet to see a concrete example of how our "redoubling education and research" will result in a new cycle of innovation.
so far it all reads like straight quotes from the textbook of capitalism.
the jobs are going, going gone.
you want fries with that?
15 - Ms. Tek
I am 100% for better education in the US.
The thing is:
Our public Grade Schools and High Schools suck in general.
College is very expensive to go to.
As far as innovation is concerned (and education as well, for that matter), you would need to have a leader who will make this one of her focuses and goals. As I posted in an earlier piece, the current leader seems to be doing all he can to keep the US from innovating in engery and technology.
I would like to see someone who would actually put education and technology as a important part of their goals. The whole school system needs to be revamped. I don't think states should be in control of what can be taught and what cannot be taught. No more of this creation/evolution debate. Hard core science and technology needs to be taught to our children.
I was lucky... tho I hated it at the time, my parents put me in private school. (The Nuns taught me evolution and creation... I think I came out alright). I got a better education because of it. The thing is that a good education should not be something for only the rich. On top of it, we need to make technology exciting again!
A lot of younger people are starting to turn away from technology because they see what is going on in the job market. This, once again is long term bad news for the United States.
16 - Chris Kent
There are plenty of people who think offshoring is the only way for companies to compete in a global economy. If they don't compete and lose out to other companies we could lose even more jobs in the long run.
I am glad Craig you are swallowing the sand, grain by grain. I don't see how anyone could even remotely argue that offshoring (what a bullshit euphemism)
is good for the economy or good for America. It's good for the companies that supply Bush with millions in campaign funds. Thus, we puts together a nice little propaganda clique, they create the story that essentially says - "Layoffs, er excuse me, Offshoring, makes us happy!"
And the people buy it, because if Bush the Prez says it's true, then it must be. And so we swallow the grains, one at a time, because we have nothing else to swallow.....Layoffs, er Offshoring, is a terrible practice. Just because the present administration has figured out a way to sugar-coat it doesn't mean it's right.....
17 - Mark Saleski
re: #12. craig, i attacked nobody....just the general idea that is restated everywhere in the media that offshoring of jobs is good for our economy in the long run.
i just don't agree with it.
sorry if i sounded pompous, that wasn't my intent at all.
18 - Chris Kent
Ms. Tek,
The only way to revamp schools is to provide more money to the teachers who teach. Salaries are low, so creative, qualified people enter into other professions, thus the public school system has a lot of lousy teachers who make Technology boring. A good teacher makes the class exciting, no matter the subject. It's an art. Most children of wealthy families do not go to public schools, so this important monetary clique does not see the necessity for raising school funds/teacher salaries.....
19 - Mark Saleski
gee, i hope we're not going down "SchoolVoucherRoad" here. it just ends up in a big nasty ugly fight.
20 - Joe
Chris-
There's a slight disconnect between comment 11 and your last comment, first you sound like you want to discuss the issue then you're castigating Craig as a fool for trying to do that. What's up with that? From a purely economic standpoint it's quite easy to argue that offshoring is good for the economy and America. Costs are cut, profits go up (good for companies), companies pay higher taxes on profits(good for America), and there you have it. They do have solid reasons for supporting that course of action. That's not to say that I agree with the practice, but I understand the reasoning behind it. If you want to pretend there isn't any justification for the practice your merely weakening your own position. And you might be surprised that those same companies that provide campaign funds for Bush are also doing the same for Kerry to hedge their bets. You've stated that you think outsourcing is a terrible practice but haven't offered any concrete evidence of why, can you? Even before outsourcing became an issue, there were still layoffs.
21 - Shark
Well, there are now 275 additional Americans who can no longer afford to travel.
Save money. Lose customers.
We'll end up with companies 'out-sourced' to the max -- and a population too broke to buy their products.
Good for America?
mmm. we'll see.
We might need a new "welfare" program that just pays us to shop.
22 - Shark
Chris, re: Fort Worth 'little town"
Over the last decade or so, we've become Big-D-ified.
We're now a big, overpopulated, overpolluted, traffic-jammed, strip-centered, hell-hole.
Just like Dallas.
But, man, a $4 expresso is r-e-a-l easy to locate!
23 - Joe
Shark-
At $8/hr they probably couldn't afford to travel, prior. The outsourcing just sealed the deal.
I understand your point that there are some inherent risks to outsourcing but I think the best case and status quo scenarios are being brushed aside in lieu of the worst case.
Is anyone here suggesting a complete banning of outsourcing? Or are their acceptable degrees and if so, why?
24 - Joe
This is sort of related, it has to do with immigrant labor and how its taking away summer jobs from teens.
25 - Chris Kent
Joe,
Rather than layoff employees - many of them, long-term - companies need to anticipate trends. Layoffs (I will not call it by any euphemism) are signs the company is being poorly managed, not that the economy is bad or they are trying to compete in the global market. Employees are the companies most important commodity. When they are sacrificed for employees in another country, then the company is poorly managed. I argue that companies that buy into the outsourcing/offshoring bullshit, which Kerry has never tired to promote (show me an example of that), will become extinct anyway because poor management led them to the layoffs of employees in the first place.
Rather than layoffs, businesses need to learn to cut out waste from the top to the bottom (if they don't pay executives $40 million a year, they might not have to lay off 1,000 workers to improve the bottom line). A well managed company has impressive profits, productivity and employee loyalty. Most importantly, nothing improves worker loyalty and productivity like telling the truth. A well managed company does not hire people they have to lay off in a year. They never lose focus. It's all about inefficiency in an organization.
Joe, it has nothing to do with the petty analysis of comment #1 with comment #11. It has everything to do with Americans being put into the streets. Get with the program.....
Shark, haven't I already noted my feeling for Starbucks?....lol