09.26.07
Posted in Uncategorized at 15:49 by lnxwalt
I am not an anti-immigration person. I believe that a carefully thought out policy, especially in regard to our neighbor Mexico, is an essential part of maintaining our security. Indeed, Mexico’s own social and economic stresses, if not relieved through emigration to the United States, threaten to spark another revolution right on our border.
However, the Governor of California, along with the governors of some other states, recently wrote a letter requesting an increase in the quota of H1B work visas. In technology fields, at least, this is not used to fill in places where there are no qualified Americans who can do the job. Instead, this program is used to dislodge highly-paid American workers and replace them with underpaid foreign workers.
The letter, which states, “businesses should be able to find the world’s best educated workers,” ignores the fact that thousands of the “best educated workers” who already live in the U.S. have difficulty finding work. The letter also repeats the myth that there is a “critical shortage of highly skilled professionals in math and science.” This myth has long ago been debunked by a Duke University study published five months ago.
A recent case shows that there is some limited recourse to those imported workers, but who (on a temporary visa sponsored by the employer) has the resources to try to fight the pay discrimination? Especially since that is the entire reason why employers bring these guys over here.
From Visa Law Blog, We often receive calls from frustrated employees on H1B visas complaining that employers are not paying them the required wages. Many are about to loose their jobs and want to learn more abot their rights.
Honestly, do you think there are not enough programmers already here waiting for an employer to see their resumes on Dice or Sologig? What about technical support? System and network administrators? Low-level supervisors and middle-level managers, including those with MBA degrees?
What is H1B being used for? When a corporation has some technical work, but does not want to pay the wages that workers in that field require. They import people from third-world countries on visas that give those employees little recourse against any actions that the company takes.
Shame on you, Governor Schwazenegger. Shame on the large companies that were behind this, but shame on the governor for failing to inform himself about the issues affecting California’s workforce and California’s smaller businesses that are trying to compete while following the law.
Let’s make this clear: H1B gives large corporations advantages over competing smaller businesses (including small, locally-owned businesses [SLOBs]) because the SLOBs are forced to pay workers the legal and prevailing rates, while corporations can import lower-pay workers. This cost advantage can be used to lower prices long enough to drive competitors out of business, or to inflate the compensation awarded to the CEO of that corporation.
H1B is a weapon against locally-owned small businesses, the kind of business that is the engine of the economy. I urge California readers to write our governor and ask him to withdraw his letter, instead asking for a level playing field: ZERO H1B visas until all legal residents working in the particular job field are employed in the field. This makes it fair for all of us, instead of just padding the pockets of corporate CEOs.
Permalink
09.20.07
Posted in General Management, Industry News, Legal Issues at 3:32 by lnxwalt
In what has been called a “stinging rebuke”, the European Court of the First Instance (CFI) ruled against an appeal by Microsoft in a long-running case pitting the world’s largest software company against the European Commission.
The second-highest court in Europe on Monday rejected Microsoft’s attempt to overturn a landmark European Commission antitrust ruling and record fine, bolstering smaller software makers and putting market leaders on notice that they cannot leverage dominance in one technology niche to squelch broader innovation, industry and legal experts said
This from an article in the International Herald Tribune. I noticed that the article did not get all the details correct. For example, it said the court “ordered Microsoft to obey a 2004 commission order to share confidential computer code with competitors.” The only problem is that the court made no such order. This is about the languages that software programs speak to one another: protocols and file formats, and also about illegal bundling of Windows Media Player as a way to squeeze RealPlayer out of the market. It has nothing to do with sharing code.
In my experience, RealPlayer is an inferior product, so given the choice, most users will choose WMP over Real, although they might choose to use Quicktime instead of either one. The problem, which even many technical people do not understand, is in using dominance in one area (such as operating systems) to push you into dominance in another area (such as media players or Web browsers). It violates a longstanding prohibition on misusing an existing monopoly in order to build another one.
“What the court did was uphold EU law, which makes it illegal to leverage a dominant market position to obtain similar dominance in another area,” said Michael Reynolds, a Brussels antitrust lawyer with the firm Allen & Overy who filed the initial complaint against Microsoft in 1998 on behalf of Sun Microsystems. “Microsoft argued that the software industry, because of its dynamic growth, was an exception. But the court dismissed this argument.”
The US has similar laws, but the Department of Justice is lax about enforcement, believing that it is better to let the market sort things out. The problem with that is when you have situations where the market fails to remedy the wrongs. An example of that is when one provider obtains monopoly share of the market. Competitors, if they exist, fight over the crumbs that are left over, never being serious challengers to the monopolist. The monopolist, in this case Microsoft, then gets away with all sorts of abusive and questionable (if not illegal) behavior.
The question for non-technical people is this: what does this mean to the users and purchasers of computer software? It means that, assuming that Microsoft behaves according to the law, consumers will have more choice–choice of operating systems, of media players, office suites and more. Businesses will have more choice of operating systems and other software to use on their servers. Many of the choices that are available are less costly than Microsoft products, so for many people and businesses, this is good for the wallet.
I encourage you to open your eyes and look around. The choices that are available already would surprise you. Look at the Ubuntufamily of GNU+Linux operating systems, the StarOffice, OpenOffice, KOffice, and now Lotus Symphony office suites, and an incredible variety of other ready-for-prime-time software applications that are available now. Many of them were not ready just a few years ago (although I have to say that for someone that was willing to do a little work, the software was already even with commercial competitors).
Recognize that even big companies will eventually get punished for wrongdoing, but they often continue to do wrong anyway. The best thing to do is to spread your dollars around so that no single company controls your (or your business’s) destiny.
Technorati: legal microsoft
Powered by Bleezer
Permalink
09.17.07
Posted in General Management at 19:54 by lnxwalt
Someone from Japan was searching on “China Product Problems” and came to this site. I guess they read my blog article about the problem being the fault of American corporations. I still stand by this. With their race to the bottom, corporations are selling American citizens into slavery.
It is bad enough that their actions destabilize governments in third world countries. The pharmaceutical industry, for example, with the way they distribute medicines, allows needless deaths in Africa and Asia. It isn’t that they are evil or that this is intentional. But their quest to squeeze every possible dollar out of their products outpaces the ability of impoverished countries to purchase adequate supplies. Most of those countries are also full of corruption, so the pure stuff goes only to the favored groups, while others get adulterated or fake medicines, if they get any at all.
This can also be seen in the oil industry, where actions meant to ensure a large and stable supply prop up questionable governments and cause civil wars such as the one that tore through Angola several years ago. In that case, Gulf had a contract to pump oil, which funded the government and attracted the ire of UNITA rebels. In that country, as in a number of others, it would have been better for the local residents if the Western multinational corporations had stayed home.
The continuing problems with lead contaminated toys can not just be blamed on a rogue overseas contractor. The U.S. companes did not go there for the fun of it, or because the contractor’s toys were better. They went there because they did not want to pay American workers a living wage. When a company makes it clear that they are willing to underpay the people who make the products that make them their income, they will surely be willing to cut corners elsewhere as well.
Once you indicate that you are willing to cut corners, there are always some unscrupulous companies and individuals who are willing to help you cut just a little more. Toothpaste too costly to produce? Thin it with a little antifreeze. No one will notice. They were right–we did not notice for many years. It is not even clear that we have really noticed yet.
I challenge you, as I’m challenging myself: for the month of October 2007, refuse to buy products made outside the country unless you can not find that kind of product domestically produced. I am not talking about saying, “The US-made products cost too much.” Neither do I mean a US branded product that may be made in another country. I mean that I want us to attempt to limit your purchases to products produced by laborers here in this country. I think we will be surprised at how hard it will be to find them.
Until Americans once again prefer to do business with smaller, locally-owned businesses [SLOBs] (with local employees and products that are locally produced or at least domestically produced), this will be more and more common all the time. If you care about the future of your nation and your community, then you should devote the lion’s share of your spending to SLOBs and OMBs (owner-managed businesses) in your community.
Scouring the world in search of cheaper labor means that you eventually export the expertise that made your company strong to begin with. It is a strategy without a future, the intentional long-term surrender of our economic independence. By exporting our skilled work, we leave nothing for our next generation, which is troubling if you have a young adult just joining the workforce and finding only low-wage retail and restaurant employment available.
Permalink
09.09.07
Posted in General Management at 23:43 by lnxwalt
Is it just me, or are nearly all large companies treating their customers like dirt?
In the last few months, I have had negative experiences with:
- Two computer vendors
- A mobile telephone service provider
- An automobile rental company
- A large discount retailer
- A bank
- A large hotel chain
In each case, they act as though they have too many customers, and they would not care if they lost a few.
This is really about what economists call “market power”. If you can unilaterally raise prices or change the terms under which you will sell your product or service, you have market power. In such a situation, it usually means that you have a large enough share of the market that there are few alternatives available for your customers. We all know how wonderful the telephone company and the cable company treat their customers. They do this because they realize that there are few alternatives for their customers.
If you do not like being mistreated by the cable company, call the satellite television company. What? Your landlord forbids external antennas? Well I guess you have to accept the way the cable company treats you.
You don’t like it when the company financing your purchase decides that your payment was ten days early so it does not count as this month? Don’t tell me you are unhappy about being charged a late fee for a payment that was cashed before it was due. If you don’t like it, switch finance companies.
The reality is that we need to prefer to purchase from smaller, locally-owned businesses (SLOBs) and owner-managed businesses (OMBs) in our communities. In turn, SLOBs and OMBs need to offer locally-made products and locally-generated services, rather than simply reselling the products or services of some large, out-of-the-area corporation. Consumers have more leverage against SLOBs and OMBs, so these businesses are more likely to work at trying to satisfy their customers.
Think about it. When you went to buy an MP3 player for your son, how hard was it to find a salesperson who would talk to you and explain how they worked and what features were most important for different user profiles? I experienced exactly that myself and wound up buying from a completely different location based on price.
When you went to buy a piece of computer-related hardware, such as an external hard drive, a printer, or even a set of speakers, was there a knowledgeable and helpful salesperson available? Did someone attempt to baffle you with cow dung?
I am telling you that my own recent experiences tell me that there is a market for someone (a local businessperson) who will offer competent service; honest, knowledgeable, and helpful salespeople; and reasonably-priced, locally-made products in the above fields. I am looking to offer some services myself shortly. Yet, there is room for several such businesses in your own local area and mine as well. All we need is a way to convince consumers to choose SLOBs instead of big, faceless corporations.
(Now if only Sun Microsystems was serious about taking my money. Jonathan, I am looking to buy a small server, but your marketing representative doesn’t seem to understand that I am about to send the check to Dell instead.)
Permalink
09.04.07
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:28 by lnxwalt
I went to work today, but there was a power outage, so I left. When you work with servers and networks and VPNs, you are not going to get much done if nothing runs.
I was thinking about why we celebrate Labor Day. A century or two ago, there were no protections. Industrial age factories sprung up, led by men who would do anything to make more money, or so it seems. Labor built this country, and skilled, intelligent labor, enabled the “robber barons” who owned and ran the factories to quickly build unprecedented fortunes. See the MSN Encarta article about the industrial age.
Remember the child labor that we like to chide third world countries about? We had children working full days in dangerous jobs without safety equipment here.
Thanks to the labor movement in the 19th and 20th centuries, much of that kind of abusive mistreatment has been banished from our shores. Wage increases and benefits raised the standard of living for the common person, which is true economic growth.
My question today is how do we prevent it from coming back? As employee wages stagnate and skilled technical jobs move overseas where people will work for quite a bit less than local residents can afford to work, how do we prevent our corporations from becoming bless-me clubs for CEOs?
CNN/Money reported that CEOs make 364 times more than workers. It is a fascinating article, because it shows pretty clearly that our rewards are skewed. Fund-shufflers are even more highly paid than CEOs, according to the article.
I believe that the obscene compensation at the top of corporations could not happen if our smaller businesses were a stronger and more influential part of the economy. It is time for smaller businesses to look at large companies in our localities and determine how we can beat them. When small locally-owned businesses (SLOBs) and Owner-Managed Businesses (OMBs) are regularly beating their larger out-of-the area competitors for sales and contracts, and on issues of local significance, suddenly, those larger out-of-the-area competitors will have to cut pay at the very top, because they will not be able to squeeze their laborers any further.
SLOBs and OMBs are the hope for American business, for communities all over the country, and for the individuals in each community that need jobs that won’t turn tail and run the first time that sales go down in an area. SLOBs and OMBs do not get the $1 land contracts, because they do not promise to produce 500 minimum wage jobs (and cause the loss of 350 fairly decent-paying jobs in the process). SLOBs and OMBs also tend not to suck money from towns and cities all over the country into a headquarters building that is quite remote from most of the field locations.
Let us make it clear: if America wants its employees to be fairly compensated, then America needs to focus on building and strengthening the small businesses that will do the job. As this happens, however, small business owners need to be aware that it is not “your” business as much as it is “your community’s business” held in trust by you. In times of profit, don’t be afraid to throw in bonuses for your employees and contributions to community-based non-profits. In times of hardship, don’t be afraid to sacrifice and to ask your employees and community to join you in sacrifice.
America is a mess. Corporations helped put us in this condition. Small, locally-owned businesses and owner-managed businesses can help every community to develop its own solutions that work for that community.
Permalink
09.02.07
Posted in Local News, Political at 16:36 by lnxwalt
As you’ve probably noticed, this blog speaks fairly often about policy issues that affect smaller businesses. One of the biggest issues we deal with is education. There are a couple of really big reasons for this.
First of all, most of us have children, nephews, nieces, grandchildren, and neighbors going through some level of the educational system. It is in our interests to see that they get what they need to step into their futures.
Secondly, as small business owners or prospective small business owners, the fruit of our local educational systems are the raw materials that can and hopefully will make us different from our competitors.
Local educator Rick Piercy said it this way:
Piercy described public education as an assembly-line system that worked well in its time, when large populations of manual laborers were needed, but times have changed and America is now competing in a global economy.
“We take kids by chronological age, we put them in a group and move them down the line year by year,” he said.
Like an auto-assembly line that produces essentially the same car with minor differences — some with air conditioning, some with automatic transmission — America’s schools have little of the versatility needed in the 21st century.
“Everybody who liked the comfort of not changing keeps things mired,” he said, urging a willingness to radically rethink the way America’s children are educated.
We really need to take a look at what he’s saying. Monolithic, assembly-line, age-divided education has not worked since at least the late 1970s, as the first twinges of global competition wiped out manual labor in textiles and clothing and began crushing our steel, shipbuilding, and automobile manufacturing industries.
Unfortunately, his charter school has become mostly a smaller version of a regular school, as California has cracked down on the independent study and other innovative methods that enabled motivated students to actually learn something that interests them and prepare for their futures.
Having spent some time supervising recent graduates in quick-service restaurants (”fast food”), I can tell you that most students are not prepared for the workplace:
Why do you think this is? The school system gives specific, step-by-step directions on a daily basis. You don’t give students a schedule of what chapters to read and what work to turn in at the beginning of the semester, because some students will complete the entire schedule in two or three weeks. They will then quickly become bored and begin to entertain themselves, distracting other children in the process. So instead, we teach children to require close supervision in order to accomplish even routine tasks.
When my nephew Pikachu moved from one school to another in a different city, his teacher kept punishing him because of his mathematics work. He had learned to do the problems he was presented, but he did them the way they did it in Victorville, not the way they did it in his new city. He got the correct answer, but did not follow the specific sequence of steps that the teacher wanted him to follow.
The school system in your local area needs to be fully-controlled by local interests. Are most of the area's graduates likely to remain in the area? If so, students need to learn general entry-level skills for jobs in your area, without shortchanging those who will go to college or move to a different area. As long as the state and federal governments are setting standards and ignoring local needs, schools will continue to fail, because they will fail to adapt to local needs and conditions.
One exception that I can think of: in areas like South Los Angeles, schools need to have outside help, particularly the help of good-sized owner-managed businesses. These students need to learn entrepreneurship and then be launched out with some financing, so they can help to change their communities. Even there, once they are aware of what they need to do, outside control needs to go away so the schools can adapt to the needs of their communities.
Permalink
Posted in Political at 15:38 by lnxwalt
Shorter breaks help kids recall lessons - Yahoo! News
Interesting theory. As I understand it, you forget about half of what you learned in just 21 days, with the bulk of the forgetting coming in the first few days. In California, a number of our school districts are using these kinds of schedules. In the Victor Valley area, it started with the use of separate “tracks” to shoehorn more children into existing facilities. Once the local school districts built more schools, they kept the schedules, without the tracks.
The result? After six to ten weeks of classes, the schools go on a break for one to four weeks. After the break, the first few days are spent reviewing what was covered before the break. At least with MJ and his friends, it appears to have slowed down their progress.
You have to remember that most kids hate school1. The more that they differ from whatever the school’s norm is, the more that they hate it. If you pick up things more quickly than most students, you hate the repetition and the slow pace. If you pick up things more slowly than most students, you hate the quick pace. If you speak another language at home, it is more difficult to absorb things in English, at least until you learn spoken and written English at the same level as most of your peers.
For most students, sitting while someone lectures and scribbles on a whiteboard is about the worst way to try to teach them. Spending six to eight hours having someone yak at you, and expecting to remember most or all of what they covered is idiocy. That’s why recess is probably the most educational part of school. Not only do children learn coping and social skills that they will need for their entire lives, but they also get to rest their brains from overt learning and slip into the far more effective covert learning mode.
How many young males have you seen that can’t read at grade level, but can figure out how to “juke” you into an ambush on the latest online first person shooter game? What is the difference? In the game, he is learning by doing, for the purpose of using what he learns and not learning for the sake of learning. When Ms. Jones says to read page 37 of Beowulf aloud in class, not only is it overt and intentional learning, it is learning for the sake of learning when he has no intention of ever using what he learns.
MJ, for example, learns by reading and doing and discussing. He formulates arguments, promotes and defends them, and learns from this kind of interaction with his peers. Sit him in a classroom, listening to a lecture, and he cannot even tell you what topic the teacher discussed. He also cannot absorb very well in a typical classroom full of people. He seems to require that the number of learners stays south of twenty. I’ve noticed that even twenty-five students significantly degrades his achievement. I don’t know if it is instructor attention so much as the fact that large classes require an intensely structured environment (students sit and listen and take notes while the instructor lectures, no questions until and unless the instructor asks for them, no discussion or interaction among students, and students are not allowed to do other things such as read the textbook for another subject).
As he heads off to college, it will be important that he is aware of this, and that he selects his school and classes to meet his needs.
When I was in school, I learned by reading and doing. I wasn’t much for argument or discussion, as it took time that I would have preferred to use learning. All these years later, I’m finding that it hasn’t changed. Lectures, presentations, audio and video tapes present obstacles to me learning, as do large groups (larger than five to ten individual learners), although smaller groups within a larger class is a workable alternative.
(Note: I am not an education researcher, but I have read a bit on the subject. I also noticed the difference in performance when MJ attended a local charter school. It wasn’t just his performance that improved. It seemed like nearly every child in his school was doing better than they did in the “lecture and notes” programs at the public schools. For more on what the school was doing differently, see this article in the Victorville Daily Press.)
Do you disagree? Why is it that the three most enduring songs for young people are “Schools Out,” by Alice Cooper; “Another Brick On The Wall,” by Pink Floyd (”We don’t need no education …”); and the traditional “no more pencils no more books, no more teachers dirty looks” song?
Blogged with Flock
Tags: education
Permalink
