RBC replaces Canadian staff with foreign workers

[eyeball]

I just went back over the last 3 pages, all of them anti-free trade so... I don't see how I haven't heard a word you've "said".

Unless you're saying them out loud while you type them onto yours posts at MLW, in which case I guess I haven't heard you.

The last three pages?

Christ on a stick Michael you've been busy apologizing for this sort of shit for years now.

[eyeball]

I certainly don't argue against those policies. Thanks to Canada's fair EI policies, and excellent job search systems as well as education grants I was able to realign and start moving forward again after 5 years or so in the doldrums.

Let me guess, now you work for EI processing applications for education grants.

I don't know what else could be making stories like this seem like such good news to you.

[Canuckistani]

GH, eyeball and Canuck - I don't see anything you're writing that would indicate you support Free Trade anyway.

I'm not for a globalization that turns us back into hewers of wood/drawers of water. I'm not for a globalization that creates a transnational elite that is able to play off nations against each other for their own interests. I'm not for Free Trade with countries that have totally different social organizations that allows them to exploit workers the way we can't (and shouldn't) do here - that's not a level playing field. Enriching a few Canadians with Free Trade while the middle class loses their jobs and standard of living is not Free Trade I would support. Free Trade with the US or Europe are one thing, with China and India something else.

[hitops]

I'm not for a globalization that turns us back into hewers of wood/drawers of water. I'm not for a globalization that creates a transnational elite that is able to play off nations against each other for their own interests. I'm not for Free Trade with countries that have totally different social organizations that allows them to exploit workers the way we can't (and shouldn't) do here - that's not a level playing field. Enriching a few Canadians with Free Trade while the middle class loses their jobs and standard of living is not Free Trade I would support. Free Trade with the US or Europe are one thing, with China and India something else.

You make a trade-off with protectionist laws though. You preserve jobs for some, but you make it more difficult for others to find jobs. You also lose economically to other countries. When there are too many laws protecting workers, you start to lose ground as a nation. Tons of examples of this in Europe right now. They have been protecting their workers far better than we do for decades. Now they have nearly wrecked their entire economies. Portugal at one time was a major player. Today they are an afterthought. Spain has an unemployment rate of 25%. France has an unemployment rate of 25% for young people WITH university degrees. Almost every European country has lost ground.compared to the US and Canada, and certainly compared to China.

Just to give you an idea of how really European style polices have really worked. They are literally at the point of bank runs and loss of assets for depositors, and have made laws to allow for more. This is pure, 100%, the clear and predictable results of the bloated social state and economic protections.

Canada has been going in the opposite direction. While everyone hates on our government, we have been gaining ground, gaining stature. And we've been doing all that stuff people don't like - like exploiting resources, bringing in workers, lowering corporate tax rates, reducing entitlements. All the stuff that has again and again proven to bring more prosperity to a nation. We don't want to be China with horrendous pollution and limited rights, but can't be Europe if we want to survive.

Edited April 8, 2013 by hitops

[Canuckistani]

We've been gaining ground selling our resources, that's it. Short term gain for long term pain. Nothing in the PIGS's troubles had to do with worker protection that I can see. More about not collecting taxes and getting caught up in the same bankings scams the US did.

Germany is a model we could look at. Maintains it's manufacturing base by figuring out what it's good at. During the recession, the govt worked with companies to keep workers on ar reduced hours and pay, so that when things opened up again, they were ready with trained personnel to quickly take advantage of it - something we would never consider here. We should be training Canadians for the jobs we have, like Germany does, instead of importing people for them. Our temp worker systems is a complete sham - these are permanent postions fille by low wage workers because the employer doesn't want to pay the wages required to attract Canadians. That should be changed. And we need a proper industrial strategy that works on keeping manufacturing jobs in Canada as best as possible. We can't compete for lowest wages, so we should compete for productivity and quality instead.

[Michael Hardner]

The last three pages?

Christ on a stick Michael you've been busy apologizing for this sort of shit for years now.

Disconnect ? I said you don't write anything in support of free trade, and you said that I'm not hearing you very well.

[Michael Hardner]

I don't know what else could be making stories like this seem like such good news to you.

Mmmmm... those words that you put in my mouth taste funny.

Job losses are terrible. They're depressing, they force people into unwanted catastrophic change. You don't know what I went through when my industry went away. I don't wish that on anybody, but if they have to happen there are reasons and ways to make it happen.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm not for a globalization that turns us back into hewers of wood/drawers of water. I'm not for a globalization that creates a transnational elite that is able to play off nations against each other for their own interests.

We have other advantages in Canada besides resources.

The transnational elite existed since there were nations.

I'm not for Free Trade with countries that have totally different social organizations that allows them to exploit workers the way we can't (and shouldn't) do here - that's not a level playing field.

There appears to be no better way to bring a country into our orbit than to trade with them.

Enriching a few Canadians with Free Trade while the middle class loses their jobs and standard of living is not Free Trade I would support. Free Trade with the US or Europe are one thing, with China and India something else.

And you were vocally in support of NAFTA then ?

[Canuckistani]

And you were vocally in support of NAFTA then ?

Well since Mulroney was the one bringing it in, no. Don't trust Mr Oleaginous. But before Bush I used to be for closer ties with the US. The FTA did seem like a reasonably good idea. I think they possibly blew it with NAFTA.

[Topaz]

The credit unions are starting to look good vs banks., now that banks can take your money IF they get into real trouble, thanks to the Tories and now they are hiring foreign wortkers and besides that credit unions don't charge monthly fees. Now the did anyone tell Harper is suppose to be the PM of Canada and its people and not PM of business?

[eyeball]

Job losses are terrible. They're depressing, they force people into unwanted catastrophic change. You don't know what I went through when my industry went away. I don't wish that on anybody, but if they have to happen there are reasons and ways to make it happen.

I have a pretty damn good idea, the difference of course being the reasons why, how and for who that my industry went away. It's those difference you and so many other Canadians keep missing or roll their eye's at. That being the case I'm finding it increasingly easier to not give a shit about much beyond but me and mine too.

I guess I'm finally getting with the program.

[hitops]

The credit unions are starting to look good vs banks., now that banks can take your money IF they get into real trouble, thanks to the Tories and now they are hiring foreign wortkers and besides that credit unions don't charge monthly fees. Now the did anyone tell Harper is suppose to be the PM of Canada and its people and not PM of business?

Are credit unions safe from that?

[eyeball]

Nothing is safe from the co-mingling interests of business and government, least of all themselves ultimately.

[Michael Hardner]

Well since Mulroney was the one bringing it in, no. Don't trust Mr Oleaginous. But before Bush I used to be for closer ties with the US. The FTA did seem like a reasonably good idea. I think they possibly blew it with NAFTA.

Ok - so let's recount. Seems to me our 'approved free trade detail' list here has exactly zero entries on it.

[GostHacked]

GH, eyeball and Canuck - I don't see anything you're writing that would indicate you support Free Trade anyway.

Correct, fair trade is what is needed.

[Michael Hardner]

I have a pretty damn good idea, the difference of course being the reasons why, how and for who that my industry went away. It's those difference you and so many other Canadians keep missing or roll their eye's at.

The things that happened to your industry and to mine are completely different.

Not caring is pretty cool, I suppose, and a natural reaction. In fact, the world looks pretty terrible when you're going through this kind of thing - unfair and uncaring. But why give in to the negativity ? In the end, it's all just change and people trying to manage it.

[Michael Hardner]

Correct, fair trade is what is needed.

Seems pretty elusive. In fact, it's probably easier to just say no to everything and say you're waiting for "fair trade".

Especially if you're against job losses.

[GostHacked]

Seems pretty elusive. In fact, it's probably easier to just say no to everything and say you're waiting for "fair trade".

Especially if you're against job losses.

The fact that yours was outsourced should be an indication of the problem. But you don't have a problem with it in the end.

Several things to consider when this happens.

1 - Jobs sent overseas increase the bottom line of a company, via cheap labour and lax environmental laws

2 - Jobs sent overseas can no longer contribute to the Canadian government in terms of taxes.

3 - You now have to compete more with others for possibly the same job making much less than before, and that also results in less taxes for the government.

4 - Prices of the services will NOT go down just beacause the company is saving money by outsourcing.

5 - Outsource to the point where the majority of the work is done out of house, risking your ability to control and continue to properly do business.

I've noticed a trend with you that you seem to push back on all of the major things we are seeing across the board. I would not hesitate to call yourself a globalist. Or is it a case of Stockholm Syndrome? You lost your job to outsourcing and you are just A-OK with it.

[Michael Hardner]

The fact that yours was outsourced should be an indication of the problem. But you don't have a problem with it in the end.

Several things to consider when this happens.

1 - Jobs sent overseas increase the bottom line of a company, via cheap labour and lax environmental laws

2 - Jobs sent overseas can no longer contribute to the Canadian government in terms of taxes.

3 - You now have to compete more with others for possibly the same job making much less than before, and that also results in less taxes for the government.

4 - Prices of the services will NOT go down just beacause the company is saving money by outsourcing.

5 - Outsource to the point where the majority of the work is done out of house, risking your ability to control and continue to properly do business.

I've noticed a trend with you that you seem to push back on all of the major things we are seeing across the board. I would not hesitate to call yourself a globalist. Or is it a case of Stockholm Syndrome? You lost your job to outsourcing and you are just A-OK with it.

Sorry - let's be clear here. You seem to be arguing that job losses due to free trade are proof that free trade is a bad thing ? I just need to understand that before we continue. Is my assessment right ?

[The_Squid]

As to Hitops, Bonam and Canuck, your arguments could be used to justify

forbidding the use of cell phones and ATMs on the grounds that such

devices eliminate productive jobs, put people on welfare and lead to

greater inequality in society.

Replacing workers with ATM's is not illegal. (People are still needed in Canada to build and maintain ATMs, btw)

Replacing Canadian workers with foreign ones that are allowed to work in the country IS illegal. The difference between the two is simple, but you don't seem to grasp it.

[GostHacked]

Sorry - let's be clear here. You seem to be arguing that job losses due to free trade are proof that free trade is a bad thing ? I just need to understand that before we continue. Is my assessment right ?

I don't know how clearer one can make it for you Mike. What do we get in return for the job losses?

Free trade, we give it away, FAIR trade and we get something in return of equal value.

Edited April 8, 2013 by GostHacked

[Michael Hardner]

I don't know how clearer one can make it for you Mike. What do we get in return for the job losses?

Free trade, we give it away, FAIR trade and we get something in return of equal value.

One more time: are you arguing that job losses due to free trade are proof that free trade is a bad thing ?

[August1991]

If you're paying to employ a human, it might as well be in Canada, because that money gets recirculated throughout the community, back into taxes....

By that logic, we should never trade with foreigners because "our money goes abroad".

The difference of course, is that we're not talking about machines which can do the job better, or even people who can do the job better. We are talking about people who can do the job worse.

What difference does it make if we manage to improve productivity through a robot, or finding a foreigner who will do the job at lower cost. In both cases, Canadian society overall is better off.

Regardless my argument is not against outsourcing. My argument is against protectionist policies for our banks, which are an even large distortion of the free market. Given that we have the protections, which are bad, we might as well convert those protections into protections of domestic jobs. The best case scenario of course, would be to get rid of all of them.

There are many alternatives to Canada's chartered banks. It's a competitive business. If I were looking for protected industry, I'd look at cellphones first.

[August1991]

It has to do with why anyone expects their fellow Canadians to give a shit when they lose their jobs.

Look eyeball, when you find a faster/quicker route home from work, you are better off. True, your local gas station may not see things that way but we know that your gain outweighs his loss.

At heart, that's the issue here. RBC has found a better way to operate. It improves productivity. That's a good thing that's been going on for centuries and thankfully, we can now enjoy the benefits of this greater productivity.

[August1991]

With the outsourcing the competition for the remaining jobs gets tighter. The employer has an advantage now that they can almost pit the applicants against each other to see who would be the cheapest!

There is no upward mobility in the job market with continual outsourcing. The usual result is 'do you want fries with that?'

The so-called "race to the bttom" argument. By your logic, we should forbid the use of computers because they will work 24/7 for practically nothing. With computers, wages will fall to mere pennies. We'll all be impoverished!

Middle class jobs should not be disappearing. They should be getting replaced with new middle (or upper) class jobs. If our economic policies are causing middle class jobs to disappear and not be replaced, or to be replaced with minimum wage jobs, then those policies are flawed, and should be re-examined. New technology, that August talks about, creates new (usually better) jobs that go along with it. But replacing Canadian workers with Indian ones creates nothing. Seems a pretty obvious distinction.

It makes no difference if someone who loses their job to a foreigner, a computer, or a change in market conditions. They lost their job. But that frees the person to do something else more valuable with their time.