|
National Conference of State Legislatures
Labor and Workforce Development Committee
April 29, 2004
Remarks Paul E. Almeida, President
Department for Professional Employees
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations
Labor Market in Flux: How can States Respond to Outsourcing,
Labor Shortages & Job Creation?
Many people are alarmed at the recent trend of
outsourcing/offshoring of white collar and information technology
jobs. This trend, which is clearly accelerating, is affecting
workers all over the country, at every income and education level.
Technology companies are laying off American workers from
high-paying desirable jobs while they add thousands of jobs
overseas. Corporations are shifting jobs in call centers,
accounting, engineering, medical technologies, computer, and
financial services offshore, among others. CNN’s Lou Dobb’s show has
been tracking companies that export jobs. The list of verified
companies that are outsourcing totals over 450 and reads like a
who’s who of Wall Street. Some local, 31 state governments and many
federal agencies/departments have even begun to outsource
administrative jobs, which is an outrageous misuse of taxpayers’
dollars.
The surge of outsourcing can be traced to the
explosion in the last five years of H1-B and L-1 visas which saw in
excess of over million foreign guest workers enter the U.S. As they
developed their core competencies in high tech and other fields they
have returned home and taken these and future white collar and other
jobs with them.
Based on a survey
of the world’s 100 largest financial services firms, Deloitte
Research found that these companies expect to shift $356 billion
worth of operations and about two million jobs to low-wage countries
over the next five years. Forrester Research Inc. predicts that
American employers will move about 3.3 million white-collar service
jobs and $136 billion in wages overseas in the next 15 years, up
from $4 billion in 2000.
The use of foreign
labor has already had a negative impact on U.S. wages in certain
sectors. According to Sharon Marsh Roberts, chair of the government
relations committee of the Independent Computer Consultants
Association, outsourcing has forced down hourly rates by 10 percent
to 40 percent for many U.S. computer consultants.
Offshoring may also
have a disproportionate impact on African Americans, who are already
under-represented in high-tech fields, according to the Coalition
for Fair Employment in Silicon Valley. From 1998 to 1999, black
engineering employment in the Pacific states dropped 20%, according
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And African-American-owned
technology firms will lose opportunities to compete for government
contracts if more of them go overseas.
If these trends continue to accelerate, we will
see even more dramatic job loss and wage erosion affecting workers
throughout the income scale. This will severely impact the wages and
job security of the American middle class, in addition to depriving
state, local, and federal governments of tax revenues. Policymakers
must recognize and acknowledge the severity of the problem and act
quickly to stem the job loss.
When manufacturing jobs started moving
offshore, we were told not to worry, that the U.S. comparative
advantage was in services and high technology. We were assured that
the new global division of labor was both natural and benign: we
would keep the high-paying, high-skilled jobs, while the developing
countries would do the actual work of making things. For decades,
American workers were told to simply acquire more skills and
education in order to succeed in the U.S. job market.
The merchandise trade deficit hit almost half a
trillion dollars last year ($485 billion), an all-time record. While
the goods trade deficit has been growing steadily since the early
1990s, our trade surplus in services has traditionally offset some
of that growth. The U.S. trade surplus in services grew from $46
billion in 1991 to a peak of over $80 billion in 1999. The services
surplus fell somewhat in 2000 and in 2001. However, in 2002, the
services surplus plunged by almost $20 billion, to only $49 billion.
This enormous single-year decline is largely due to growth in
imports of private services, which almost certainly reflects the
outsourcing that has already been taking place. In 2002, the U.S.
surplus in advanced technology products also plummeted, shifting
from a surplus of $4 billion to a deficit of $17 billion.
These negative shifts have contributed to a
record high current account deficit, the broadest measure of
international activity, which includes trade in goods and services
as well as investment income flows. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan
Greenspan has warned that at almost 5% of GDP, the current account
deficit is dangerously high and unsustainable. There is another
deficit that is a direct result of outsourcing and that is a social
security deficit. As fewer and fewer workers are paying in to the
system outsourcing will bring the program further into harms way at
a date much earlier than projected.
Offshoring is not
spurred by a lack of skills or education here in the United States.
In June 2003, an estimated 1,286,000 Bachelor's degrees were
conferred, along with 436,000 Master's, 80,400 First Professional,
and 46,700 Doctoral degrees, as well as 633,000 Associates degrees.
Degrees in all these categories are up substantially since the
mid-1980s, as young people have heeded the advice given them to
acquire more education. Department of Education projections show a
steady increase in all degree categories between now and 2010.
Offshoring is not spurred by a lack of skills
here in the United States. The unemployment rate for electrical
engineers rose to 7.0% in the first quarter of 2003, the previous
high quarter for electrical engineers was 4.8% in second quarter of
2002. The unemployment rate for electrical engineers was 1.2% in
2000, and throughout the 1980’s when unemployment rates for all
workers got as high as 9.5%, electrical engineering unemployment
rates never rose above 2%. BLS also reported in 2003 that electronic
engineering unemployment at 7.0% as well and computer software
engineers at 7.5% and computer hardware engineers at 6.5% the last
two categories are new designations for BLS.
Just as the labor movement has fought hard for
trade and tax policies that will help the U.S. manufacturing sector
thrive and survive, we also need to take a close look at the
policies that impact service-sector and information technology jobs.
Several policies to better balance workers'
needs for quality employment and growing overseas investments in
offshoring, including:
* Making sure that our tax policies are
consistent and coherent – at the national, state, and local levels.
Many of the companies rushing to offshore jobs have received and
continue to receive tax breaks negotiated on the assumption that
they would support local job creation. We need to target tax relief
to companies that support their own communities with decent jobs.
We can and should ensure that government tax dollars are spent to
support strong communities and jobs domestically. At least 31
states are considering legislation that would ban the outsourcing of
government contracts to companies that ship work offshore.
States introducing the Keep Jobs in [State] act: California,
Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska,
New Jersey, South Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin.
The New Jersey legislation was spurred by news
reports that a company contracted by the state of New Jersey to
administer electronic benefits to welfare and food stamp recipients
had contracted the jobs fielding phone inquiries to Bombay, India.
There, English-speaking workers, some with fake American names
answered service calls. Legislators pointed out the irony of using
taxpayer dollars to send entry-level service jobs overseas to
administer a program aimed at finding domestic entry-level service
jobs for welfare recipients.
* Supporting transparency, privacy and
disclosure on the part of companies that are offshoring. Several
states have also introduced the Consumer Right to Know and Act.
This bill gives consumers that make calls handled by customer
service call centers the right to know to whom they are talking,
which country they are calling, and the right to have their call
rerouted to their country or state of origin. In addition, these
bills help protect consumers’ financial privacy by requiring
companies to secure consumers’ express written permission before
sending any of the consumers’ financial, credit, and identification
information to any foreign country.
Several states including Arizona, Colorado, New Jersey and South
Carolina have introduced Consumer Right to Know legislation.
Any laws addressing transparency, privacy and
disclosure on the part of companies that are outsourcing and
offshoring must extend to their subsidiaries and/or contractors.
Transparency, privacy and disclosure laws
seem like a pretty minimal requirement that ought not to be
impossibly onerous. However, some of the affected companies are
opposing the bill and arguing that it would violate U.S. obligations
under the World Trade Organization (WTO). Companies ought not to
assume they can only do business if their customers are in the dark
as to their operations. Customers have a right to know who is
answering their call and where that person is located, just as they
have a right to know the ingredients in a box of cereal.
Furthermore, this legislation is entirely in compliance with our WTO
obligations in this case. It treats foreign and domestic companies
equally and simply requires truthful disclosure on the part of
companies providing services to the U.S. market.
* Adopting tax and budget policy that encourage full employment,
not policies that reward companies by expanding tax cuts for income
earned abroad.
Finally, states need to weigh in on federal legislators to urge them
to reexamine our trade policies to make sure they are reflecting the
concerns and interests of American workers, as well as U.S.-based
corporations.
All
these factors taken together should be setting off alarm bells for
state policymakers. If an advanced degree, years of experience, and
excellent work habits are not enough to land a job, and the U.S.
comparative advantage in services and high tech has seriously
eroded, what does the future of work look like for the United
States? If these cost-saving job shifts are taken to their logical
extreme, even American corporations should be wondering where their
future consumers will be located, and how they will buy the goods
and services that are offered.
“Displaced U.S. Employees Frustrated, Angry At Information
Technology
Industry,” Hartford Courant, January 6, 2003. |