There are plenty of Engineers on the way 14

[BobPE]

I pulled this excerpt fron the NSPE web site...I thought it would make for interesting discussion here...


Some Members of Congress are seeking to attach a provision at the last minute to the must-pass bill designed to fund the federal government for the rest of this fiscal year. This provision would exempt up to 20,000 aliens holding a master's or higher degree from the current 65,000 cap on H-1B Visas for non-immigrants in any fiscal year. H-1B visas allow temporary employment by aliens in specialty occupations such as engineering. These programs have been used to displace higher-paid U.S. workers and replace them with lower-paid, often less-qualified, foreign temporary workers. NSPE supports keeping the current cap of 65,000 H-1B visas.

Please call your state's Senators and your Representative immediately and ask them to oppose raising the current cap on H-1B Visas.
Your message is simple:

Keep the cap on H-1B workers at the current level of 65,000 per-year.
This proposal to raise the cap has not been voted on by either the House or Senate this session. This issue is too complex to be added to the budget bill at the last minute without being vetted in congressional hearings.
The H-1B program has been abused in the past and this proposal would cost the jobs of U.S. engineers and scientists.
NSPE supports the use of Professional Engineers who are licensed and trained in our ethical practices. In NSPE's view, these visa programs decrease the use of PEs and allow engineers who are not trained in U.S. ethical practices to perform engineering services, which is detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.




Again, I copied the above from NSPE's web site...I am writing my congressmen...what does everyone else think?

BobPE

 

[makeup]

to all I accept. But there is a means to an end. You employ cheap labour, that means redundancy to others and buying power gone, here and replaced somewhere else your market is not expanding just changing.

 

[GregLocock]

OK, let's do it one more time.

1) In order to remain internationally competitive companies in the USA need to have either a similar cost structure to those overseas, or government subsidies for exports, or products that are clearly superior to the alternatives.

2) USAn labor at all levels is more highly paid than the rest of us.

3) Product development costs are largely a function of the cost of an engineer, and his productivity.

4) Modern manufacturing techniques, and lack of novelty, make PD costs an increasing proportion of the overall cost of a product.

5) Productivity of PD in terms of design work done per hour is reasonably uniform around the first world - the tools are available to all. The same applies to the manufacturing process, the tools are well known.

6) In order to resolve 1,2,3,4 and 5 you either institute protectionism in some form for USAn domestic manufacturesr, or allow them to alter their cost base. One way of doing this is to reduce the average cost of employing an engineer. One way of doing /that/ is to import an engineer from overseas who will work for lower wages. Another alternative is to offshore the engineering.

OK, I think that is reasonably objective and logical chain of facts and consequences. Please, correct it where it is wrong.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[makeup]

Brilliant, you are spot on at stating the obvious. But what about relationships, are you telling me that they will be the same. What about service? I was reading an interesting point the other day, its not the initial point of overseas contact but in fact their supply chain that becomes dodgy. I'm holding my reservation at the moment because I think this whole thing will fail on some really simple technicality. like people, or economics. Lets face it while economics drives it, it can also kill it.

 

[makeup]

Chartered Structural Engineer
£28-34000
Poole UK

Who in their right mind will go for this. Will an overseas engineer cater for the UK building regs?

 

[GregLocock]

" Will an overseas engineer cater for the UK building regs?
".

I don't see why not. We design cars for local markets all around the world. We have a homologation department who spend their lives making sure that we are legal in each state and territory.

Now, whether anyone who is qualified would want to work for $US 61k is a good point. That is a UK problem and is one of the reasons I live and work in Australia.

"But what about relationships, are you telling me that they will be the same." Coordinating work across different time zones is a slight pain, but with some flexibility in working hours it is achievable.

You are right about supply chains. Obviously JIT goes out the window when you have six weeks stock trailing across the Pacific in containers. That's six weeks of defective supply that will need rectifying, and you'll have to air freight replacement parts in. Of course by then the initial buyer will be working on something else, he'll already have his slap on the back for succesfully outsourcing that contract.

Oh, sometimes I find it helps to state the obvious, it reveals assumptions that may not be valid!



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[makeup]

I didn't mean for my comment to sound obtuse, your views are excellent. I except the fact that large scale production has a definate advantage in out-sourcing. But there is a huge market that cannot be serviced from overseas. The " I need it now" brigade and the "can you just" group will always have a place close to the requirement.

When I was training as a manager years ago, we had an economic specialist who predicted that the UK would become a third world state in the future due to the prosperity of the then 3rd world states. I think your views are shared across the UK with the work problem and moving to OZ. We have a major exodus of skills to your neck of the woods as we speak. Now whether you have the capacity is yet to be seen or will you find yourselves in the same boat because of the bloody pom.

 

[davefitz]

Today's news indicates congress is considering the Microsoft proposal to eliminate all limits on H1B visas for foreign students with Masters degrees. Apparently the "hitech" industries need new engineers with graduate degrees, and there is a paucity of US born engineers with graduate degrees in EE and Computer science.

The US colleges offer foreign students a visa as an inducement to enter US colleges, which forms the backbone of the college - based research industry ( or racket, depending on your mindset). These research projects are largely finded by grants from the gov't , and partially by large industrial grants.

These foreign students either replace or displace US college graduates that are not entering the same graduate curricula- most US college grads have large loans that they need to pay off ASAP, and thus cannot afford the luxury of a grad school delay. Basically, the foreign colleges are used as a "farm team" to source grad students to US colleges, and these graduates from US grad schools are the ones that the H1B visa system is supposedly targeting. Many ofthe foregin educated students graduated from schools that were finaced by the state, ie socialist economies to some extent.

 

[flamby]

davefitz and EddyC,

I would prefer not to enter into the muddy waters of who-funds-what debate. Nor into the capitalist-socialist divide which is for namesake in the present world scenario and the difference is blurring anyway as I see it (most evidently in Eng-Tips posts, in threads like this).

You are right in stating that industry is primarily pushing the motion that will allow increased intake of foreigners into USA. This indicates industries' willingness to employ more from outside, maybe because of higher expectations of locals or low efficiency or low educational standards.

So much for the un-productivity of foreigners...

Bye.

 

[davefitz]

Actually, there is a commonality between the engineers complaint against more H1B visas and the current complaint by US schrimp farmers against imported schrimp ( anti-dumping surcharges). IN the case where the foreign students are from a society which pays for their students' college education ( as opposed to the US practice of students financing their own eduction via loans), the use of H1B visas for students from such countries could be viewed as "dumping" in the sense that their "costs of production" are artificially low and unfairly competing against US students.

Of course, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that US engineeers would organize a legal case to defend their "property right" and oppose such "dumping".

 

[2dye4]

I plan to backup to a technician job. I give up
25% of my pay but get the same health insurance.
I don't worry about scheduals and politics.
I clock in and clock out and get overtime!!
Let the ambitous immigrants take these engineering
jobs.

 

[zekeman]

I think the far greater problem for US engineers and the whole middle class in general is the rampant outsourcing of these jobs to societies that pay a fraction of the salaries and benefits.

If this continues, the US will be a welfare state with only two classes- the poor and the rich; the latter representing corporate America will flourish even though their per capita worldwide profit will shrink, the total profits worldwide will be equal or greater than present. Corporate greed has no bounds.

I think that in view of this, Americans should buy only American made products and boycott any company that outsources our jobs, now while we still have some clout.

Moreover, it seems to me that our engineering societies including the IEEE and ASME, for example do not do enough to promote our best interests and maybe corporate America has some hand in their feeble response.

Finally, when you talk about the cost impact of "high priced
" engineers on the total cost of a product, it is minscule compared with even advertising costs. A superior engineering team could easily blow away the cheaper competition and has historically been the hallmark of a free robust, and creative society.And what about the long term security of the US. If you discourage some of the great minds from pursuing scientific endeavors because you outsourced their wouldbe jobs, then where will the 21st century breakthroughs come from to find solutions to starwars, space and environmental type projects to protect us . From India,China Russia, UK?
Wake up America, it may already be too late!

 

[GregLocock]

Well then, if you agree with your last paragraph, all we are waiting for is the superior engineering team to get its act together and blow away the competition.

As I have demonstrated from REAL figures, the cost of developing a car is typically equal to the manufacturer's profit on that vehicle. It is not an insignificant cost, it is about the same as the direct labor content for example.

I hope you have sold all your shares in businesses that have outsourced their engineering or manufacturing (or, I suppose anything else) and you have made sure that your pension fund has done the same? Otherwise you are benfiting from outsourcing.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[zekeman]

If you took the time to READ the second paragraph. you would see that I said corporate America profits would be "equal or greater "
And, by the way where do you get the data to back up your claim of cost of development.
Finally, if that's the case why aren't the Chinese and Russians competing in the world auto market? It seems their costs should be fractonally lower.

 

[makeup]

if you cant look after your own who can you look after.

 

[GregLocock]

The Chinese are coming in the auto market. Three years before they are self sufficent, five years before all the other cheap exporters face stiff competition in most markets, ten years before they dominate. The Russians are behind the eight ball in too many ways to catch up.

Typical engineering cost of a new program : 0.5 billion to 6 billion dollars (check the trade press for confirmation)

Typical sales figures for a model : 50000-500000 per year

Typical life of a model: 4-8 years

In my part of the industry the lower end of all those ranges applies. Profit per vehicle is published in many places, more or less accurately.

I did read your second para, so, are you benefiting from offshoring - ie do you directly or indirectly invest in companies that offshore? If you are it seems a bit hypocritical to complain about it.

I do not regard off-shoring as evil. I see it as a transfer of activity to those areas best able to provide it.


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[4Pipes]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. It's not the only factor but a big one. If the employers insurer's on both sides of the water did their jobs rather than just taking the money they would require PE status.

In order to be insured an MD requires qualifications that consist of theoretical exams and certified job experience. A driver needs a driving licence to be insured (in theory at least). An engineer needs none or only a woolly statement that is easily circumvented to be insured by his employer.

Look at the risk. Even the worst or unluckiest MDs or drivers in the land might kill a couple of people in a lifetime. An engineer has the potential to kill hundreds in a single error.

I know I am old and cynical but something does not add up. I always thought insurance was to cover risk or have I missed something.

 

[moltenmetal]

flamby:

Canada is awash in engineering immigrants. Just visit

http://www.geocities.com/martinsmoltenmetal/index.htm

if you are confused about this issue- you'll see that Canada experienced a 12-fold increase in engineering immigration in a decade where our economy and jobforce grew by only 20%. Rates have stabilized near 2001-2002 levels, generating a massive cumulative over-supply. Thousands of these poor folks come here expecting a high paying engineering job and end up working in factories or driving taxis. Montreal, Vancouver and particularly Toronto, are hardest hit because the vast majority of recent immigrants choose to settle in these major population centres. 54% of the "skilled immigrant" class of economic immigrants choose to settle in a city with only 17% of Canada's jobs.

I have no problem with immigration at current levels. Canada's a great place to live and may be worth taking a lousy job to have the opportunity to raise a family here. Canada's a remarkably accepting place for immigrants in general, and the engineering profession has been doing a surprisingly good job of integrating the elligible members of this recent wave of "skilled workers". The only problem I have is with people speaking to potential immigrants or potential engineering graduates without the actual information about the supply and demand situation in our profession- so many idiot simply assume there's a general shortage of engineers here, without even bothering to look up the stats or to find out the outcomes of the most recent wave of immigrants. Even worse, I hate the liars who deliberately spread this false hope of a general shortage of "skilled workers", luring prospective immigrants here to certain disappointment and regret- often in an effort to line their own pockets by keeping engineering salaries low and working conditions poor.

As to competing against engineers in India and China and other developing countries, I'm totally OK with that too, within the limits of the protection of public safety from defective engineering. Competition from the developing world is inevitable- protectionism is rendered nearly impossible by means of the Internet, even if you wanted to try it. But these engineers would probably fare better in their own countries given the current oversupply situation, given the comparative advantage of paying living expenses in their home country versus here.

 

[paulfrancis]

Fortunately, though, the number of foreigners coming to the US for graduate school is starting to fall.

Paul

 

[ingineer4977]

Though my name may appear to be foreign sounding, I am a US citizen, born in the USA, and working towards becoming a professional engineer (PE). I will be obtaining my PE within another 18 months. I am also former military.

The main problem that I see with engineering here in the USA is a combination of things.

First within the USA alone there are too few new engineers being graduated to fill the open opportunities. This will hurt us if not addressed.

Also, many people in the USA do not view engineering and manufacturing as a glamourous job, and would rather have a job that is more of a desk job. Engineering is not viewed as a cushy desk job. Many of those with technical degrees view working in manufacturing as beneath them.

I have also talked with many people and they tell me that engineering is a good profession, yet they think the training and education is too difficult for them. They are not used to all of the analysis and math required.

The average layperson does not really understand what an engineer does, yet they know that an engineers are professionals with good careers and jobs.

These factors create a shortage of engineers in the USA. Whenever there is a demand, there will be some way of supplying the demand. Right now, the supply is with the foreign trained engineers. Until we address misconceptions in Western society, more and more engineers will be foreigners, as it is these foreign countries that are graduating the greatest number of engineers.

Rahul Laxman Iyer

 

[flamby]

moltenmetal,
Good post.
Regards.