News » October 22, 2003
White-Collar Blues
Professional jobs shifting overseas
The loss of more than 2 million jobs so far in the Bush administration has been a particular source of anger among Democrats. This was highlighted in early October with an announcement by air-conditioner maker Carrier that it was moving 1,200 jobs from Syracuse overseas—a major blow to that upstate New York city.
Continued job losses during what is supposed to be a slow recovery are leading to calls for new laws to protect American manufacturing. In fact, there is a much graver threat to American workers.
Economists studying workforce issues say as many as a third of the jobs lost since 2000 were white-collar, ranging from customer service representatives and computer programmers to accountants, engineers and lawyers.
Indeed, the big story in coming years may be how corporations are “offshoring” the very jobs pro-globalization politicians and academics have long said are the American laborer’s salvation.
“People always had this class bias,” says Marcus Courtney, president of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers in Seattle, a unit of the Communications Workers of America that is attempting to organize workers at Microsoft and other technology companies. “They’d say, ‘Geez, of course blue-collar jobs will go overseas. Those workers are just caught in the past. If they’d just go back to school they’d be fine.’ But what do you say now to the X-ray technician, the accountant or the engineer with a master’s degree when their jobs go overseas?”
According to Forrester Research, a Boston-based consulting company that tracks business trends, between 2000 and 2015 the United States could lose as many as 3.3 million jobs overseas, a good number of them high-paying and white-collar. And that’s a low-end estimate. Others see losses double that amount.
IBM recently told employees it was planning to shift thousands of white-collar jobs to other countries. That should come as no surprise: besides contracting out many of its own back-office operations overseas, IBM is a leading provider of corporate outsourcing services. The company recently announced it was taking over most back-office operations of Procter & Gamble’s, with much of that work going overseas to an IBM outsourcing subsidiary. IBM’s outsourcing operation also handles much of the finance department operations for BP, one of the world’s largest oil companies.
Corporate managers are loath to attribute the loss of white-collar jobs to simple cost saving—preferring to say they are “strategically refocusing” on their “core competencies”—but cost-cutting is driving this trend. Countries like India, South Africa, China and the Czech Republic have countless well-educated computer experts, accountants, mathematicians and economists, fluent in English and ready to work for a fraction of what their U.S. counterparts would demand.
Offshore outsourcing of white-collar jobs also is easier than moving factories overseas. Producing goods overseas for sale in the United States always has been a risky endeavor. There are shipping risks (a pre-Christmas dock strike, for example, could erase a year’s profits), exchange rate unpredictability, country risks and, of course, labor problems at home.
White-collar job shifts don’t pose these problems. With no products involved, there are no tariff issues. And should one outsourcing country develop political troubles, the contract could be shifted to another provider in a different country. Meanwhile, with few U.S. white-collar workers unionized, resistance is minimal.
Indeed, one particularly ugly aspect to this new phenomenon is that U.S. companies fly in foreign workers, have their American workers train them, and then send them back to their overseas homes with the American trainer’s job. “People put up with this without complaint because they’re afraid if they complain it may hurt their severance payment or job recommendation,” said the CWA’s Courtney.
“Attitudes are changing,” Courtney says, noting that his local’s subscriber list has grown from 2,000 to 16,000 in the past six months. “But there’s a long way to go,” he says.
Meanwhile, strategies aimed at saving manufacturing jobs, such as tax credits, retraining funds, federal contract “buy American” requirements and the like, will do little to stem white-collar job flight.
“Congress and elected officials just have failed to grasp that this is a threat to America’s middle class,” Courtney said. “This is not about free trade; it’s about job exportation.”
Continued job losses during what is supposed to be a slow recovery are leading to calls for new laws to protect American manufacturing. In fact, there is a much graver threat to American workers.
Economists studying workforce issues say as many as a third of the jobs lost since 2000 were white-collar, ranging from customer service representatives and computer programmers to accountants, engineers and lawyers.
Indeed, the big story in coming years may be how corporations are “offshoring” the very jobs pro-globalization politicians and academics have long said are the American laborer’s salvation.
“People always had this class bias,” says Marcus Courtney, president of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers in Seattle, a unit of the Communications Workers of America that is attempting to organize workers at Microsoft and other technology companies. “They’d say, ‘Geez, of course blue-collar jobs will go overseas. Those workers are just caught in the past. If they’d just go back to school they’d be fine.’ But what do you say now to the X-ray technician, the accountant or the engineer with a master’s degree when their jobs go overseas?”
According to Forrester Research, a Boston-based consulting company that tracks business trends, between 2000 and 2015 the United States could lose as many as 3.3 million jobs overseas, a good number of them high-paying and white-collar. And that’s a low-end estimate. Others see losses double that amount.
IBM recently told employees it was planning to shift thousands of white-collar jobs to other countries. That should come as no surprise: besides contracting out many of its own back-office operations overseas, IBM is a leading provider of corporate outsourcing services. The company recently announced it was taking over most back-office operations of Procter & Gamble’s, with much of that work going overseas to an IBM outsourcing subsidiary. IBM’s outsourcing operation also handles much of the finance department operations for BP, one of the world’s largest oil companies.
Corporate managers are loath to attribute the loss of white-collar jobs to simple cost saving—preferring to say they are “strategically refocusing” on their “core competencies”—but cost-cutting is driving this trend. Countries like India, South Africa, China and the Czech Republic have countless well-educated computer experts, accountants, mathematicians and economists, fluent in English and ready to work for a fraction of what their U.S. counterparts would demand.
Offshore outsourcing of white-collar jobs also is easier than moving factories overseas. Producing goods overseas for sale in the United States always has been a risky endeavor. There are shipping risks (a pre-Christmas dock strike, for example, could erase a year’s profits), exchange rate unpredictability, country risks and, of course, labor problems at home.
White-collar job shifts don’t pose these problems. With no products involved, there are no tariff issues. And should one outsourcing country develop political troubles, the contract could be shifted to another provider in a different country. Meanwhile, with few U.S. white-collar workers unionized, resistance is minimal.
Indeed, one particularly ugly aspect to this new phenomenon is that U.S. companies fly in foreign workers, have their American workers train them, and then send them back to their overseas homes with the American trainer’s job. “People put up with this without complaint because they’re afraid if they complain it may hurt their severance payment or job recommendation,” said the CWA’s Courtney.
“Attitudes are changing,” Courtney says, noting that his local’s subscriber list has grown from 2,000 to 16,000 in the past six months. “But there’s a long way to go,” he says.
Meanwhile, strategies aimed at saving manufacturing jobs, such as tax credits, retraining funds, federal contract “buy American” requirements and the like, will do little to stem white-collar job flight.
“Congress and elected officials just have failed to grasp that this is a threat to America’s middle class,” Courtney said. “This is not about free trade; it’s about job exportation.”
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Dave Lindorff, an In These Times contributing editor, is the author of This Can't Be Happening: Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy. His work can be found at This Can't Be Happening.

SAVE 53% OFF
Reader Comments
My colleague and I have often debated the merits of IT professionals becoming organized, perhaps in the form of a Guild. What’s clear is that there is not a unified voice in Congress representing white collar workers.
I encourage concerned readers to visit www.naea.us—an organization dedicated to stemming this tide.
Posted by Paul on Oct 22, 2003 at 3:38 PM
we need to wake up and build a big wall (figurative of course). no more jobs going out. no more foreign stuff coming in. free trade is killing us.
thanks for the information. i see all jobs leaving america if this corporate greed continues.
Posted by Chet on Oct 23, 2003 at 9:28 AM
Posted by Paul Tracy on Oct 23, 2003 at 12:00 PM
To follow up on my comments of yesterday, I do want to commend our local Congressman, Rep. Lloyd Doggett, for taking action on this subject. I am more of a moderate Republican, but this democrat has my respect!!
Posted by Paul on Oct 23, 2003 at 3:24 PM
As much as I applaud the efforts of those organizations that want to stem this tide, there has to be more discussion at a more fundamental level. Reality—and the working reality—is more “liquid” now because of computers and how quickly and steathily capital moves around the world nowadays. The current capitalists are multinational and could care less about local communities. So, when the factory moves work overseas and is able to do so, it’s looking to cut costs—which is also well within the dictates of “capitalism,” and which those displaced white-collar workers would support as well. After all, wouldn’t those plucky entrepreneurs pride themselves on starting a business “on a shoestring,” and have that business be service-oriented instead of manufacturing-oriented?
This trend is here to stay, unfortunately, so the task at hand is to reframe the debate about what constitutes a society in this “globalized” and “liquified” age. Perhaps there should be talk about either rejecting exploitative capitalism outright, or taming the beast. As we can see with the loss of jobs, “liquid” and more exploitative capitalism, with the zero-sum and “winner-take-all” mentality, will wreak more havoc and trying to be somewhat isolationist about it won’t make matters any better. Indeed, Congress is clueless because they don’t understand the larger movements, which are globalized. Also, there are quite a few in Congress who benefit from “liquid” reality, so why would they act against it?
Posted by TK on Oct 29, 2003 at 3:19 PM
extended discussion >>>Continued...
Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 12 posts.