Brain, I'd like to discuss your objection to my comments; that I'd missed the point.
Lets go back and look at your arguments.
>>>1. MSFT continues to develop a major operation in Mainland China as 25% or so of the worlds population is there. It is interesting to note that based on current demographic trends, the population of INDIA will exceed that of China by the year 2020, less than a quarter century my friends. Since MSFT is a Global
company it makes perfect sense to invest in countries like India and China when 50% of the worlds population originates from those environs. There are cultural differences and MSFT makes software geared to specific countries and peoples when possible.<<<
OK, Microsoft will be developing universal products. They need some of the skills of the native languages and cultures for product versions, so it probably makes sense to set-up shops there too. The other benefit is that labor in China and India is about 1/10 of the labor costs in the US. All the big companies are doing the same. DELL, INTC, CPQ you name it.
>>>>I don't know what you have been reading and based on your statement "It's not that there aren't enough, it's that companies don't want to pay for experience (read age 40+) and training. They want cheap labor on the hottest technologies (foreigns and college kids)." I don't think you have worked in the tech field.<<<
I'm aware of the Standford University study on software labor shortage, the articles in the paper, and the general sense that this a developers market. I do work in the tech field. I've been in software development since 1974, on most all platforms and most languages, including the internet. I written code, lead the development on one the biggest systems we have in operation, and managed multiple projects and systems. I've set up a technical training program for 360 software engineers. Our organization has made a conscientious investment in the technical vitality of our software engineers (using videos, computer based training, and instructor lead for topics like OO, VB, JAVA, ActiveX, HTML, XML coming up, whatever is needed). And we have organizational goals that all software developers will receive minimally 80 hrs/training per year. Managements bonuses are based on achieving these targets. But, typically only large companies can or do make these types of investments in their technical staff.
>>> If anything, programmers over 40 are in high demand. They are the ones most likely to have major experience with COBOL, FORTRAN, ASSEMBLER and so forth and due to the Y2K problem I know guys working part time on the weekend pulling in an additional 50K a year over and above their regular job. Companies don't want cheap labor they want skilled labor. Skilled labor gets product out the door on time. We have articles in the paper here about high school aged kids
pulling down 35K+ a year. And yes, some of the older crowd are a little miffed because teenagers are knocking out task in days that older programmers used to spend weeks on. It makes the boss wonder if his "old gurus" have been putting forth enough effort for their paycheck.<<<
Yes, folks with COBOL, FORTRAN, ASSEMBLER experience are in high demand for the Y2K problem. If brought in from the outside, it's typically through consulting arrangements. Their value rose as the problem got more publicity during the past year, along with the fact the world still operates on systems built 10-15 years ago. (Two years ago, however, these folks were treated like second class citizens.). In 2 years they won't be needed for this problem, we'll see where the value is.
35K per year is considered cheap labor in the software industry. Kids "knocking out tasks", is not the same as designing mission critical systems. You also must admit (if you are a developer) that the tools and languages available today make coding faster and easier than lower level languages like Assembler or COBOL. However, the need for thorough analysis and solid design has not changed.
I don't know about where you work, but in my organization during the past couple of years there has been an emphasis on recruiting from the colleges. I interview these folks. Nice kids a few tech/language classes, perhaps some even have had some decent project experience or internships. But guess what? They come in less than half of what we'd have to pay someone with experience. Hate to tell you this, they are considered cheap labor. In the meantime, there are mentoring programs, senior buddies that help them learn the ropes. They don't come in 'knowing' everything. Software engineering is more complicated than that.. at least if you're in a big shop with literally hundreds of systems and lots of interfacing systems. They get a few years experience and once they hit the 3-5 years they typically find their next job. Typically they are their most marketable after about 5 years with the latest skills.
>>>Nothing prevents anyone from picking up a book or going to school at night to learn, extend and enhance programming skills/languages. The bottom line being. You owe your allegiance to your skills and not your job. If you understand this fundamental principle of work today then the rest will follow.<<<
No disagreement here that those who are motivated and continue to learn will always stay ahead and be in more demand within their own company of if they change jobs, the places that can afford them.
But have you considered the following: most companies have set salary ranges and IT budgets they have to work within for the people they hire. Software development is the most expensive operation a company undertakes. Software engineers typically command the highest salaries in an organization (unless it's an engineering company). Folks with 10-20 years experience AND hot skills are very expensive. Most companies are mandated to stay within a planned IT budget. They may take on a couple, but they won't staff their departments with 100-150K employees. Have you ever heard the phrase 'up and out' . There are so many software professionals that have gone into consulting because it's the only way they can still get a better salary. They hit a ceiling for promotion and increases, unless you've gone into management. (This may be changing in companies that use broad banding and pay for skills, but it's not a generalized practice to the best of my knowledge). Then for folks that are in middle management, the next things that happens, is the company restructures (downsizes) removes the middle layer of management (and guess what, those folks don't have the hands on hot new skills that allow them to easily get another job). It's sort of a vicious circle. A lot more folks go into this profession than stay here. ... and we then we have a skill shortage (that is for a reasonable price).
Brian, do you see what's happening.? Yes there aren't enough skilled developers at the price that companies want to pay.
I thought Greg had a rather clever satire of all this.
>> Evidently all the US software personnel are unmotivated millionaires, so they will get moved to management where they can be cut effortlessly in the future to cut more expenses, boost the stock price more, and everybody gets a "pay" raise.<<
If you'll complete you're SI profile, at least so there's a email address, I'll send you a recent paper that goes into many of these points in much more detail.
Regards,
Laura |
