Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Call Centre "outsourcing"

With the news that Aviva are getting rid of 2000 jobs, and moving them to India, along with Lloyds TSB moving another 2000 jobs and the HSBC saying theyll move 4000 more, the Labour government's idea is let them do it. Theyre even letting the National Rail Enquiries Service do it.

Leaving aside the issue that how on earth can some guy in India tell me the quickest way to get from Inverness to Fort William on the train, or even (as Ive discovered) understand something that isnt on their script (such as "hes not here" when they ask to speak to my dad), I cant decide what I think of this.

The jobs should not be allowed to leave the country, and any company who uses an "offshore" call centre should have to pay 400% tax on it, but I think it really has come to something when these call-centre jobs are so important. They are low-paid menial work, and it really is disgusting that the UK employment markets, certainly in the North East and South Yorkshire, are so dependent on these jobs.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree. This is nothing but a profit-maximising operation by the companies involved. Higher tax and/or government financial penalties would be in good order.

    Some of the 118 directory enquiries companies are doing the same thing. I got a bloke once who just didn't understand what I was saying (which I guess it's fair enough, since I could not understand what he was saying either :rolleyes: ). The call lasted nearly two minutes and he was unable to give me the number I needed.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Unless you are expecting the people you phone up to know every conection in the railway system, or whatever off the top of their heads thats totaly unrealistic. They will virtually always be checking a database and as long as thats designed well then theres going to be no difference where they are.

    I'm against protectionist economics in most forms really so I'd say that any type of increase in tax for offshoring would be a bad idea.

    The unions who are fighting to try and keep these jobs should put their efforts into re-training their members and helping them get sustainable jobs.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Would you also support that Nissan remove its car plant form Sunderland?

    This firm is Korean, why should it produce cars in Sunderland? It has moved operations overseas because it sees this as beneficial to its profits.

    Suggesting that companies should only locate their jobs domestically is a two way street. It means that UK companies would not move their low skilled jobs abroard but also means that foreign companies would not move their high-skilled jobs to the UK, not a good thing.

    What you should be encouraging is that those made unemployed are helped back into work through appropriate training and encouragement of investment in jobs where the UK has an advantage.

    Protectionist economics will not benefit the UK in the slightest.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not sure if car manufacturing is a good example for that Toadborg. When car makers open factories in other countries they're usually expanding, not moving. Expanding abroad is necessary for a number of reasons.

    Companies like Dyson however, that out of pure greed move their factories to Asia in order to make even more profit and close here sacking many hundreds in the process, are a different ball game. I can't see any justification for such a move- certainly not from a company that makes massive profits already and is in no danger of going under.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Companies will do anything for profits, that is how the economy works I am afraid.

    What you say about the car industry is partly true but the fact is that Nissan, A Korean company that as far as I know makes large profits produces many of its cars in Sunderland when it could in fact produce them in Korea. The Uk has benefited at the expense of other workers.

    Also think of the benfit is does to developing economies. Why would you want to deny developing countries a chance at growth. Considering so much of what indians but is made in the developed world it only seems fair that they should produce some of what we buy.

    Again this issue is a multi-faceted one, protecting UK industries, and jobs by introducing market controls would not be a good move........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There's not a lot governments can do as this is what happens within free trade, big businesses will always do whatever necessary to reduce costs. The public has the option in certain cases whether to purchase products from these companies or to switch to a competitor whose employees are based here.

    And just think, all those jobs going to India thats less Indians who will be flooding these shores. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Toadborg
    Companies will do anything for profits, that is how the economy works I am afraid.

    No, that's how society and governments have allowed the economy to work, I am afraid. It is indeed the status quo and one which companies use as a sword of damocles with hightoned threats toward any who dare challenge their perceived supremacy.

    Nevertheless, that is neither how the economy could work (and work to the betterment not only of the rich western nations, but also for the remainder of the globe, developing and developed nations alike). The key is to put the corporate world in its place with rules that it cannot evade or buy its way out of.
    What you say about the car industry is partly true but the fact is that Nissan, A Korean company that as far as I know makes large profits produces many of its cars in Sunderland when it could in fact produce them in Korea. The Uk has benefited at the expense of other workers.

    First off Tb, Nissan is Japanese not Korean. Secondly the reason that Nissan, Subaru, Toyota and a number of other Eastern car manufacturers produce in the UK is neither due to displacement of manufacturing jobs, nor predominantly expansion (although the very implantation of such facilities is as Al has said, expansion and not displacement).

    The main reason for UK production has long been as a means of avoiding EU car import quotas by producing vehicles according to EU local content regulations. The European car manufacturers have long been a powerful interest in EU regulatory protectionism which slapped quotas on Japanese, Korean, Malaysian etc. car imports, making them non competitive against the cheaper European models produced in the member states.

    The UK merely afforded these manufacturers the most attractive green field policy to establish facilities within the EU, and thus gain an EU branding for what are otherwise third country products. That's the long and short of that.
    Also think of the benfit is does to developing economies. Why would you want to deny developing countries a chance at growth. Considering so much of what indians but is made in the developed world it only seems fair that they should produce some of what we buy.

    This is the wonderful spin that we are sold by corporations, however the reality of their interest in relocation of the means of production has nothing to do with the magnanimity of developing the economies of poorer regions, and everything to do with exploiting the absence of corporate taxation, just wages, evnvironmental protection standards, worker safety standards and a host of measures which have come about precisely because of the unchangeable character of industry.

    Moving to developing countries, which by and large are governed by dictatorial regimes, easily bribed and brought onside, is an demonstration that companies require much more severe but global rules, not less. Otherwise all you've done is set the wildfire loose on nations ill equipped to deal with the abuses and resultant human fallout which will inevitably ensue.

    Let us not forget Union Carbide and its exemplary practices in Bopal.
    Again this issue is a multi-faceted one, protecting UK industries, and jobs by introducing market controls would not be a good move........

    Yes multifaceted, and subject to enough spin and rhetoric to fill the thames thrice over, but the market by nature must be controlled as it will not, by historic demonstration, control itself. The issue is therefore not whether to introduce controls, but rather which controls would best harness the beast whilst maintaining overall economic prosperity for the largest possible percentage of the population, both here and around the world.

    As things stand, our corporations are actually hegemonising control of the market and stifling true competition that would best serve the developing countries.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Call Centre "outsourcing"
    Originally posted by Kermit
    Leaving aside the issue that how on earth can some guy in India tell me the quickest way to get from Inverness to Fort William on the train, or even (as Ive discovered) understand something that isnt on their script (such as "hes not here" when they ask to speak to my dad), I cant decide what I think of this.
    My dad and I like to mess with their poor little minds... hehehe. Anyway, if I need to travel any distance, I usually use the National Rail website. It probably uses the same database as the call centre, and would give the same results. I hate talking on the phone, anyway. Especially if it involves going through menus. "Press 1 if you know what you want..."
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There is definatly the side of the argument that people overseas may not know directions and things as well probably.

    I know this probably isnt going to sound the best counter argument and im hoping i dont sound anything like those gits i had to listen to at the Adam Smith institute. But yes the companys are evil or exploiting those in poorer countries but however surely the workers will be paid more and in safer conditions than having to work in some factory.

    I dont weather i support these things, i definatly disagree with the capitalists doing it to make more money
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nissan is not a good example. They build cars over here to avoid the EU's protectionist attitude to cars. Its why many Japanese cars sold in the US are US-built too.

    In some instances I freely agree that protectionism does not work, but I say this: if we tax them to have the jobs overseas, removing the cost benefit, then they wont do it. And as well as this, what are the big corporations going to do? If we make Dyson build their cleaners in Coventry, theyll have to build them in Coventry.

    Globalisation is a theory spun by people who have the agenda that raping poor countries is OK if "big business" can make more profit. It doesnt work like that- either the market behaves ethically, or it is forced to.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hmmm thought i said essentially that. Is that the Reader's Digest abridged version then, Kermy? ;)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Car manufacturers usually wouldn'#t dare move away from an established country like the UK, because it would probably lose them more money than they would save.
    Why would anyone want to buy a product that is developed in what can only be described as inferior conditions. Manufacturers move their plants to third world countries so they can be turned out cheaply and quickly.
    Quality usually suffers as a result.

    I think what we'll see is a backlash against the companies that are moving jobs away from Britain. I'm thinking of moving away from HSBC because I'm not comfortable with my account details being accessed by an underpaid, poor person based about 4500 miles away.
    Everytime I have rang them with a query they have made the problem worse and it is the same with directory enquiries as well.
    Yes call centre jobs may be unskilled, but they are still jobs, and they are essential for the rest of us to lead a productive life.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Is that the Reader's Digest abridged version then, Kermy? ;)

    yep, you drone on too much;)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry, I simply believe any issue worth discussing should be put into full context. A byproduct of the political machine I guess. ;)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Sorry, I simply believe any issue worth discussing should be put into full context. A byproduct of the political machine I guess. ;)

    Yeah, and I cant be arsed:)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :(Reading this topic makes me almost physically sick…
    Thing many of you guys say are terrible.
    ‘The bloody bastards should have to pay 400% ( why not 4000000%?) tax, stand them under government financial penalties, put the corporate world in its place, so on, so on…’
    What is their crime for Lord sake??
    Because they want to spend their own money in a way they prefer?
    Because they want to do things every of yours does every day?
    Japanese Towncop!!
    Did you never change your barber or grocery or internet provider or zillion other things just because you wanted more bang on your buck?
    Did you never choose your occupation, change your job, demand anything from your employer to ‘maximise your profit’?
    Did you never buy German cars, Japanese cameras, Taiwanese umbrellas, Australian lamb, Brazilian coffee, New-Zealand wool, French wine, Holland cheese putting in this way those whiny British Labour Unions in troubles?
    What a miracle! When YOU do this it is your right. When OTHERS do the same it is their ‘greed‘, ‘supremacy‘, ’selfishness’.

    You are not ashamed?
    Absolutely?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Utter rubbish. Employers DO HAVE a responsibility towards their employees. Starting with the responsibility of not sacking hundreds of them and moving shop elsewhere so instead of making £300m profit a year they can make £450m (which goes mostly to shareholders anyway).

    Anyone who shows such contempt for the wellbeing of this country and its workforce should be made to pay the price, so other employers think twice before moving the company abroad OUT OF PURE FUCKING GREED ruining hundreds of families in the process.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big business is an easy target, but its a slightly pointless one unless your actualy going to do something about it. And of course, the term 'big business' is far too all encompasing. There are companies that are bastards and a lot who are neither nasty or nice.

    Its a regulatory issue, if anyone is to blame its government, not business, they just play by the rules they are given.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Actually no BB, they pay hefty contributions to the back pockets of politicians to have the rules written in their favour and not in the best interest or welfare of the societies in which they garner their enormous profits.

    When politicians come along with the balls to hold corporations accountable for returning just levels of recompense back to society, they find numerous ways to subvert such regulatory frameworks or simply expatriate their tax homes and executive bank accounts offshore.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'd aggree with you there, but only partly, in the end it comes down to the failure of the leaders we elect to do something about it. If a proper effort was made then trading laws could be made to be fairer. But I would disaggree with what sounds like somewhat protectionist ideas you put forward. Although maybe I'm misinterpreting you on that.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ive not chronicled my idea thoroughly as Kermy would likely take me to task for being verbose.

    Happy to discuss it with you via PM if youre actually interested.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    The issue is therefore not whether to introduce controls, but rather which controls would best harness the beast whilst maintaining overall economic prosperity for the largest possible percentage of the population, both here and around the world.


    And would you suggest that preventing UK companies moving call-centres to India is one of these controls? As this is the issue?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Interesting points Labrat.

    If the price of something you regularly buy doubled, would you keep buying that product or would you switch to another cheaper product?

    Have you done that ever?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine


    The UK merely afforded these manufacturers the most attractive green field policy to establish facilities within the EU, and thus gain an EU branding for what are otherwise third country products. That's the long and short of that.



    Ok the example was not a good one but I am sure you see the general point. If a company relocates then some people will benefit and some will lose, as is the case with a vast number of choices, does this make it a bad decision? Who is to say that the happiness of those that will lose is more important than that of those who will benefit?

    If companies were not allowed to relocate then a lot of people would be a lot poorer in the developing world, yet it has happened and the rich world is still rich..........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine



    This is the wonderful spin that we are sold by corporations, however the reality of their interest in relocation of the means of production has nothing to do with the magnanimity of developing the economies of poorer regions, and everything to do with exploiting the absence of corporate taxation, just wages, evnvironmental protection standards, worker safety standards and a host of measures which have come about precisely because of the unchangeable character of industry.


    Exactly the point!

    Economic agents make decisions for their own benfit but these decisions beefit society as a whole, exactly how the system works!

    I agree with you however that there should be some form of global agreements regarding environmental protection, wrokers rights etc but developed world govt have to help poorer govt enforce these.

    I diagree very much with the idea of countries competing with eachother to favour large companies in terms of regulations etc
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    Utter rubbish. Employers DO HAVE a responsibility towards their employees. Starting with the responsibility of not sacking hundreds of them and moving shop elsewhere so instead of making £300m profit a year they can make £450m (which goes mostly to shareholders anyway).

    Anyone who shows such contempt for the wellbeing of this country and its workforce should be made to pay the price, so other employers think twice before moving the company abroad OUT OF PURE FUCKING GREED ruining hundreds of families in the process.
    Of course. It is the duty of corporations to make profit for shareholders. You maybe think farmers, shop assistants and carpenters work from pure altruism? No, their motive is self-interest, ’greed’ using your terms. When I worked on a farm on vacations, the last thing I thought of was ‘common good’ or desire to make humankind happier (not speaking about f-ng union bosses). I just wanted to buy some toys. Does this mean I should be punished for my greed?
    I don’t know whether British kids are taught elementary economics at school ( in Ukraine kids are taught it) but every educated person in the world should know the golden words of your compatriot Adam Smith "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages.
    The Wealth of Nations, Book I Chapter II"
    It is how capitalism works and why it makes everybody wealthier.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    One thing is working for profit- another is enslaving others to increase the said profit.

    Presumably you would not see anything wrong if all companies in the country suddenly changed their rules and made their employees work 14 hours a day for a salary of £3 per month. They're within their right and so they should be left alone, right LabRat? At the end of the day, why shouldn't day maximise their profit by all mean necessary? Let's do away with holidays and Sundays off as well while we're at it.

    :rolleyes:
    It is how capitalism works and why it makes everybody wealthier.
    Well depends. The greedier and more free-market the capitalism, the more people will be made poorer, not wealthier. As it has been pointed out before, child poverty doubled during the times of Margaret 'Free Market' Thatcher. For 1 in 3 children in this country, savage capitalism made them much the poorer.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To Aladdin.
    Hah! You seem to think companies can dictate market wages? It is as if meteorologists could dictate next day weather! Laws of economics are as tough as laws of physics. How much does an average software engineer earn? Much much more than minimal wage, right? WHO does pay him? Those greedy capitalists whose only goal is profit! But they ARE NOT forced by govt to pay these wages! They are forced by MARKET!!!!
    Please but I don’t believe about kids made poor by free market. I think it is some forged statistics made up by socialists. Two things make me not to believe in it: the first is my knowledge of economics and my common sense. The second is my own life experience. I don’t have a lot of it of course but I have enough to make my own conclusions.
    And I’d like to have a little talk about this. My short working life and lessons I got from it. If you wouldn’t annoyed of course.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    tonight i called the madasafish helpline. (my isp)
    used to be in ireland. it's now obviously moved to bombay or bradford.
    the first guy i hung up on after 5mins.
    that time was spent trying to understand and spell my name!
    the second guy was brilliant. kept calling me mr roll which was funny. sorted my problem with a smile and a wave.

    but i would have been happier had that job stayed in ireland.
    it's not a matter of anyone taking our jobs it's the same old story ...the bosses selling out the workers ...therefore the community.
    yes there should be europe wide regulation. they want to make money ...it's us who has to be doing the spending or ...
    as usual ...no understanding of true patriotism, honour or decency. the bottom line is quids.
    it will back fire on them. it will also strengthen the bnp.
    people should start threatening to switch suppliers where possible.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry Aladdin!
    I meant “if you won’t be annoyed with my babbling”.
    Please, English is not my native language and I make stupid mistakes at times.
Sign In or Register to comment.