Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sounds like the beginning of the end for that company, hope they have lots of Philippine customers as they're going to lose a few here in Canada with this action
Sounds like the beginning of the end for that company, hope they have lots of Philippine customers as they're going to lose a few here in Canada with this action
Just add them to the list of other companies that have outsourced to Manila. I worked for a company that did the same. It will be frustrating for Canadian customers.
As always, there is nothing wrong with a company trying to cut costs. If person A can do the same job person B does at 20% of the cost, of course the company should hire person A.
A company's primary responsible is to increase shareholders value, not to add jobs to the country it is located in (which it shouldn't give a rat's ass about). Many seem unable to understand it.
Average people never seem to understand and refuse to appreciate the tremendous risks large business take but rather just think they never deserve the profits they earn as if they were nothing but the result of cruel exploitation of hard workers.
Have you ever called a number looking for assistance and ended up talking to "Jane Williams" with an Asian accent? I have!
What's wrong with an asian accent. Even if those CSR are in Canada, they most likely have an accent from somewhere too. Plus, why do you have to call Sears ever? I haven't as I live within 5 minutes walk to the Sears Canada Head office.
That reminds me last time I had to call CRA, someone with a very odd accent answered my call - I really struggled when talking with him.
Nothing, except the person talking is highly unlikely to be "Jane Williams". I used a couple of pseudonyms when I was a telemarketer years ago in a job that literally had me saying sales pitches in my sleep. I knew it was time to quit then!
As always, there is nothing wrong with a company trying to cut costs. If person A can do the same job person B does at 20% of the cost, of course the company should hire person A.
A company's primary responsible is to increase shareholders value, not to add jobs to the country it is located in (which it shouldn't give a rat's ass about). Many seem unable to understand it.
Average people never seem to understand and refuse to appreciate the tremendous risks large business take but rather just think they never deserve the profits they earn as if they were nothing but the result of cruel exploitation of hard workers.
Is it wrong for consumers to support a company that hires local wieners and creates local wealth? While I agree that a corporation should have the right to offshore, I also think that members of thepublic have the right to bring these decisions to light.
Is it wrong for consumers to support a company that hires local wieners and creates local wealth? While I agree that a corporation should have the right to offshore, I also think that members of the public have the right to bring these decisions to light.
trust me, most consumers only care about quality and price.
you may feel differently when typing words on the forum, when it comes to actual purchase, you will buy the product with the best price/quality ratio. [and I don't believe for a second a piece of clothing made in Canada or US will has higher quality than made in China or Vietnam]
also don't forget pay more in wages means higher prices for everything. Imagine how much your smartphone/computer will cost if every part is assembled by unionized workers in Canada who demands $25 an hour, 4 weeks of paid vacation and generous benefits. You probably won't be able to afford it and enjoy your high quality of life.
developing countries also purchase tons of stuff they can't produce from rich countries and help creating jobs, right? It is about competitive advantage. And trust me, rich countries get way more wealth than what they lose from such trading.
Nothing, except the person talking is highly unlikely to be "Jane Williams". I used a couple of pseudonyms when I was a telemarketer years ago in a job that literally had me saying sales pitches in my sleep. I knew it was time to quit then!
you apparently know nothing about the Philippines. Many of them have very anglo names. A previous Phillipino coworker's birth name was Virginia XXXX (a last name that is very English).
Why do you think a Philippina can't have the name "Jane Williams"?
As always, there is nothing wrong with a company trying to cut costs. If person A can do the same job person B does at 20% of the cost, of course the company should hire person A.
A company's primary responsible is to increase shareholders value, not to add jobs to the country it is located in (which it shouldn't give a rat's ass about). Many seem unable to understand it.
Average people never seem to understand and refuse to appreciate the tremendous risks large business take but rather just think they never deserve the profits they earn as if they were nothing but the result of cruel exploitation of hard workers.
A worker in Manila making $400 bucks a month is making a lot less than 20 percent of that job in Canada.
A company is a corporate citizen. They have a duty and responsibility to the country they operate in since they exist within the infrastructure that was built by that country. Our taxes have built the roads, transit systems that get people to work ,dependable power sources etc that these companies benefit from.
In the case of Manila with storms and floods is these call centres ( there is actually more than just call centre work off shored there ) close. Calls are they re-routed back to the few left in North America. Workers here are expected to pick up slack. Those are the days you just hang up and try later.
These jobs are being replaced in Canada with low paying part time work. A recipe for disaster. Risk? Companies take a lot less risk than you imagine. It usually works this way. Any risk taken and benefits made goes to the top. Any risks made and they incur losses, the workers and/or customers suffer.
No on is saying companies shouldn't make profits since that's absurd. What people are saying is that it's a two way street.
In the case of Sears which is sputtering at the moment, desperate action may be needed, but if they had any sense they would of at least suggested this was a temporary move until they get into a better financial state.
Companies like banks and the major telephone companies have off shored thousands of jobs when they were doing very well. The millions saved went ??? Did your bill go down? Has serviced improved? Do you find yourself talking with 4 or 5 customer service people instead of 1 after navigating push 1 push 2 hell for 25 minutes before waiting another 30?
What we lose besides jobs is taxes paid and money spent on local business. Also remember, any job is at risk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
