Posted on 09/18/2003 4:03:48 PM PDT by Mini-14
About 150,000 IT positions were lost in 2001 and 2002
SEPTEMBER 17, 2003
The study, which was presented at a congressional forum today by the Washington-based nonprofit group Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology (CPST), affirms what IT managers have seen in response to help-wanted ads. "I'm sure the number is 6% or higher," said Michael Russo, a data center manager at Wyeth, a Madison, N.J.-based pharmaceuticals giant.
A recent third-shift job in the company's operational data center drew 168 applicants. "There are a lot of people who are out of work," Russo said.
Randy Rosenthal, manager of computer operations at Southwest Securities Group Inc. in Dallas, has seen the same trend: highly qualified people with multiple degrees applying for jobs IT managers once had trouble filling. "That tells me that 6% has hit the IT area pretty hard," he said.
About 150,000 IT positions were lost in 2001 and 2002, about two-thirds of them in programming, the report said.
Two years ago, Phoenix-based water and electric utility Salt River Project had an open position for an operations analyst and received about 15 applications; last year, it posted a similar position and had 50 applicants. This year the 800,000-customer utility has a hiring freeze, said operations manager Dewayne Nelsen.
There was a sense of grim resignation about the latest report among some IT managers at a conference held here by AFCOM, an Orange, Calif.-based data center managers user group.
Several IT managers, some requesting that their names not be used, told of data center consolidations that led to layoffs or offshore plans. For the future, automation improvements and the development of "self-healing" applications will also hurt some IT career paths. The career advice from one IT manager was to avoid the technical aspects of the profession and focus more on IT management training.
IT unemployment rates were as low as 1.2% in 1997, shooting up to 4.3% in 2002.
But the overall number of IT jobs has seen remarkable growth, tripling in the past 20 years, according to the CPST, which conducts labor force and educational research for a range of scientific organizations and companies. The IT labor force grew from 719,000 jobs in 1983 to 2.5 million at its peak in 2000.
With the growth of IT came an increasing reliance upon foreign workers. This increase was facilitated by legislation expanding the use of H-1B visas, which allow skilled foreign workers to take jobs in the U.S. for up to six years. A cap of 195,000 on the number of visas that can be issued has been in place for each of the past three years, but the cap will drop to 65,000 on Oct. 1. L-1 visas, which allow companies to transfer foreign employees into the U.S., have tripled in use.
The report, sponsored by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation in New York and the United Engineering Foundation, an umbrella organization for engineering groups, draws no firm conclusion on the offshore outsourcing trend. But it recognizes predictions made by analyst firms, including Gartner Inc., which in July estimated that 10% of all U.S. professional jobs in IT services companies would be transferred overseas, along with 5% of IT positions in other businesses.
Long term, the report says more research is needed on the effects of offshore outsourcing and the workforce issues raised by it: "Can the U.S. continue to be a prime market for the rest of the world if it is a stronghold for neither manufacturing nor technical services?" the report asks. "What are the long-run implications of these trends for American standards of living?"
The CPST report concludes that while the job market for IT professionals has weakened, it remains sizable.
"For the near run, normal turnover alone will generate opportunities for people who are determined to work in the field," the report said. "The long-run outlook is more problematic. The United States does not lack, either now or in the foreseeable future, sufficient numbers of capable people who would like to work in IT. But those people may not be willing to conclude that long-run demands for their services will be good enough to support IT as a sensible career choice."
Interesting item that many folks overlook. The number of jobs in the IT profession tripled at the same time the U.S. population rose by about 25%. I know it isn't any fun being unemployed, but when 150,000 of these jobs are lost in the last few years, I'd hardly consider it a catastrophic turn of events for the U.S. economy overall.
Go figure.
Empathy - HA! Do you even know the meaning of the word? It's one of those terms that chicklet toothed corporate suits like to whine about, along with the phrase "company loyalty", when their own ox is getting gored.
Gee, I wonder why the IT people are the first one's laid off?
It's because you just don't know. That's why you wonder. Ignorance. There's nothing really wrong with your lack of knowledge, provided you're attempting to lift yourself out of that hole. Are you? Trying? If so...kudos!
It's a real shame that GOD hasn't gotten over his Jim Cane complex yet.
God told me to be nice to you, and so I will.
I mean, if we passed a law prohibiting employers from outsourcing, then they would simply close up shop here and open a subsidiary in India to do the work. I guess we could outlaw that too, and drive the entire business to India.
So we outlaw foreign investment to stop it altogether. Companies in other countries continue to take advantage of it, which results in them having lower labor costs and putting out a less expensive product.
So then we pass a tariff to even it out ... Where does it all end?
I say let the market work. If outsourcing is causing some companies to provide an inferior product or service, the market will take notice.
Take the H1B's and L1's out of the picture and they would have an employment position.
You are missing the two points I made:
1: Yeah, he lied when he took credit for it. He's lying now when he takes credit for it. The media knows he is lying but they give him credit for it, therefore they are perpetuating this lie that it was his economy so he deserves credit for it. That's insulting and has ticked me off since 1995.
After 9/11/01, most of us agree that yeah, it had already been deflating since the spring of 2000, but would have been more like deflating balloon fwapping around a while until it settled down to a level surface. (/11/01 simply exacerbated already existing problems, banks tightened up on credit and the fwapping balloon became critical mass instead.
BUBBA, however, jumped right in and said the crash was Bush's fault, MY economy was BOOMING, yadayadayada. The rest of the Democrats followed Bubba's lead, saying the crash was Bush's fault and this would NEVER have happened under Clinton because the economy was booming under HIS administration, etc, etc. You were there, you know what they said.
The public ignored them then, because we had bigger fish to fry. NOW that the next election cycle is upon us and the public is getting a little tired of constant QUAGMIRE reporting for lack of real news, Bubba, the rest of the Dems and the media, are right back out there saying the economy is BUSH'S FAULT, the economy was BOOMING under the Clinton administration, elect a Democrat if you want a job etc.
Clinton's lie, the credit for the boom, is therefore nothing more than a way of generating artificial political capital greatly resembling the artifical capital that powered the artificial tech bubble. I resent that. I think more people ought to resent that. Therefore, giving Clinton the credit he wants is bitterly sarcastic, blackly humorous payback.
Point 2: Clinton did indeed profit greatly from companies which benefited from the tech bubble. Clinton, despite popular conservative opinion, is not stupid. He knew that if he made deals, EO's and promoted legislation both here and abroad which would FURTHER profit these companies, he, Clinton, would profit even more from the donations of those grateful companies.
Clinton and his good pold boy network DID conciously meddle in the economy in order to both profit themselves monetarily and keep themselves in power.
Clinton and the DNC network deserve credit for the tiny things they did. And they WANT credit because they want the artificial political capital so reminiscant of the artificial capital driving the artificial economy. I find this insulting, and give them credit he wants as bitterly sarcastic, blackly humorous payback.
I'm surprised I had to explain that.
WASHINGTON -- The yearly number of foreign visas for IT workers and professionals coming into the U.S. will drop by two-thirds for 2004 unless the U.S. Congress acts, and an immigration lawyer group came to Congress Tuesday asking that the cap on H-1B visas not be allowed to slide back to pre-dot-com boom levels.Several HUNDRED THOUSAND H1B's in the US competing with US Citizens for IT jobs is guaranteed to increase employment. Particularly when the US Bureau of Labor Statistics shows under 2 million IT jobs in the US economyRepresentatives of Intel Corp. and Ingersoll-Rand Corp. also argued that H-1B visas are needed to fill technical positions where they can't find qualified U.S. candidates, but one panelist told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee that the visa program is taking money from the pockets of U.S. workers.
If you're in IT, or have a relative or friend who is, write to your congress critters (both senators and congressman) and tell them how you feel. Legislation is being considered NOW
The same companies that had a problem with their employees telecommuting a few days/week are now going to coordinate development work happening 12 time-zones away. Easier said than done.
A lot of the code can be spec'ed and shipped, but a good chunk needs interaction with the people who are going to use it. Face to face. Get rid of the H-1B's, and the companies will have to hire americans.
Sure did know it. By eliminating 2 characters out of the year variable on a system that was not anticipated to last to century's end we were saving significant memory and storage space. Oops. Kept it running a bit too long. Very impressive guerilla upgrades on your part Babs.
But I'm open minded. If you can explain to me why the market will not adequately punish this poor business judgment (if indeed it is), then my major objection would be removed.
Don't worry your turn will come.
Usually the influence they have is in an indirect way. The lowering of the tax burden in the 80s paved the way for the boom in the 90s, the excesses of the 90s paved the way for today's downturn. Right or wrong most people give whoever's in office at the time credit (or blame) for what's happening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.