Losing Your Job To Overseas???

One thing that I just can’t wrap my head around is the talk about shipping jobs overseas and how nasty it is and that the practice should be stopped. Now, before I go any farther, let me state unequivocally, that I don’t think it’s a good practice at all, and yes, we should be able to keep these jobs here at home. What bothers me most is WHY this is happening. Let’s examine it a little further.

The left will tell you it’s all because of corporate greed. These greedy huge multi-trillion dollar corporations are shipping the jobs overseas because they’ve found people in Pago Pago or someplace that will work for 23 cents an hour as opposed to the $23 an hour that they want to do the same job in this country. OK, I’ll agree that is a huge problem. But whose fault is it?

Frankly, I blame the unions that have negotiated that $23 an hour wage for those workers. In business terms, they’ve priced themselves out of the market. They are trying for “living wages”, and all of the benefits, and all the while the unions are trying to show the rank and file that they are paying union dues (sometimes in excess of $6,000 a year!) because the unions are worth it. And then it gets to the point where the company sees they can shut down their plant in this country and move somewhere else in the world that doesn’t have unions, doesn’t have $15 minimum wages, and doesn’t know what a “living wage” is, and doesn’t care. And they look at their bottom line, and the fact their stock price is dropping and they wonder what they can do about it. Well, but shipping 2,000 jobs overseas, they save millions of dollars a year in wages and probably millions more in benefits. Is it fair to the American worker? Or, is it a business decision because the American worker has now priced themselves out of the market when compared to the rest of the world?

And no…for the record, I agree that CEO’s that make $50 million a year while shipping jobs overseas isn’t a smart move either. But what you forget is that CEO has been told to make the company profitable for the shareholders anyway he or she can. That’s a pretty short putt when you look at it, and take the emotion of firing a bunch of American workers out of the equation. After all, what do you think the unions’ response would be if that CEO went to them and asked for a $2 an hour wage cut? There’d be a nasty strike. There’d be bad publicity, and there’d be all sorts of added expenses. The “easy” solution for the company is to go where things are more competitive, and you can’t blame them entirely.

So the next time someone on the campaign trail or someone on Facebook tells you that it’s just plain wrong to fire a bunch of Americans and move their jobs overseas, ask the question, “Why?” Why in the world would a company do that? The answer is always going to come back to profitability and money, because after all, that’s what the company’s job is to do…make money for their shareholders. They’re not there to be “good corporate citizens” or show the world how “green” they are. They are there to make their shareholders money. Period.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!


5 thoughts on “Losing Your Job To Overseas???

  1. I argued about NAFTA from the beginning. There is another perspective on this, I’m in International Banking with a major bank……..they won’t allow me say who. Oh what the hell U.S. Bank N.A. I do letters of credit etc. a lot of LCs to foreign banks for their issuance of foreign bank guarantees to beneficiary’s (customer’s or American companies). Some of the problem is regulations, regulation that is very new, and will cause business loss for American companies. I’ll explain more later, on my way to Cardinal vs. Cubs game; hope it gets rained out so I can go watch the Blues and Blackhawks. Bigger game! 🙂

Comments are closed.