main

AT&T to Take Back Outsourced Jobs

Christopher Vendemio   on 21 September 2006 - 23:12 · 22 comments & 14511 views

Advertisement (Why?)
AT&T announced Thursday it will bring home approximately 2,000 technical support jobs that had been handled by outside providers.

The U.S. phone giant said it will use in-house employees to assist customers with their self-installation of DSL (digital subscriber line) broadband access. The support staff will also answer other general questions about Internet or DSL service, e-mail, registration and browsers.

The change follows an agreement between AT&T and the Communications Workers of America union. The CWA negotiated the wage rates, benefits and duties associated with the jobs, which were formerly contracted out to third parties both in the U.S. and overseas, the union said.

The 2,000 new AT&T employees should be added to the payroll by the end of 2008, the carrier said. The company is still deciding on where to locate the call centers.

News source: C|Net

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 22 additional comments
#1 Louie Mantia on 21 Sep 2006 - 23:42
You know, that's great and everthing, but then you put the people who originally had this job... out of a job.
I hate to think that we SHOULD be outsourcing jobs, especially to other areas of the world, but without big corporations doing this, I don't think there would be many jobs for these people.
#2 warr on 22 Sep 2006 - 01:01
It is about which model the managers think is right, but the prevailing mis-belief is outsourcing is the solve-it-all. Outsourcing is a good business model for some business process, but I am also glad to see some companies reject the model, because it does not suit them.
#3 redkahn on 22 Sep 2006 - 01:13
As a person who lost his job to outsourcing, I think outsourcing sucks.
(2 replies) #4 strekship on 22 Sep 2006 - 02:15
Outsourceing really sucks. Especially when you call tech support and get an indian man on the other end with a thick accent.
#4.1 RiVaLSSJ on 22 Sep 2006 - 02:41
Exactly. It's all becoming like that - it's so annoying and they're often so hard to understand. "What!? What!? I can't understand you!"
#4.2 supersaiyanjericho on 22 Sep 2006 - 19:37
Quote - RiVaLSSJ said @ #4.1
Exactly. It's all becoming like that - it's so annoying and they're often so hard to understand. "What!? What!? I can't understand you!"


lol don't forget the delay
(3 replies) #5 skase on 22 Sep 2006 - 02:55
what about the 2000 people losing their jobs..

they have families to provide
#5.1 pyehac on 22 Sep 2006 - 03:47
Quote - skase said @ #5
what about the 2000 people losing their jobs..

they have families to provide

What would you rather have: a neighbor losing a job to some indian guy, or some indian guy losing a job to us?
#5.2 freeeekyyy on 22 Sep 2006 - 04:58
Quote - skase said @ #5
what about the 2000 people losing their jobs..

they have families to provide



US comes first.
#5.3 dolimite35 on 22 Sep 2006 - 05:32
Quote - freeeekyyy said @ #5.2
Quote - skase said @ #5
what about the 2000 people losing their jobs..

they have families to provide



US comes first.


Not really if they outsourced in the first place.
(3 replies) #6 warr on 22 Sep 2006 - 05:53
It is stupid to blame on the Indian guy who took the job from you. He didn't take yours. He was given yours. Now get it right.
#6.1 freeeekyyy on 22 Sep 2006 - 06:31
Quote - warr said @ #6
It is stupid to blame on the Indian guy who took the job from you. He didn't take yours. He was given yours. Now get it right.



Who said anything about blaming anybody? People are just glad to hear the jobs are back in the US. If they even left in the first place, these could have been outsourced to a US company.
#6.2 Space Guy on 22 Sep 2006 - 07:07
Quote - freeeekyyy said @ #6.1
If they even left in the first place, these could have been outsourced to a US company.


the point of outsourcing the job in the first place was because it is cheaper outside the US (labor) If the company had outsourced to a US company they are not saving any money.
#6.3 freeeekyyy on 22 Sep 2006 - 07:25
Quote - Space Guy said @ #6.2
Quote - freeeekyyy said @ #6.1
If they even left in the first place, these could have been outsourced to a US company.


the point of outsourcing the job in the first place was because it is cheaper outside the US (labor) If the company had outsourced to a US company they are not saving any money.



Actually, companies quite often outsource to other US firms because of less management needed due to fewer employees. Also, some US companies give higher wages than others. AT&T may provide full time employees with $35 hr wage, while company X may only have a $20 hr wage, which is quite a bit of savings.
#7 gadean on 22 Sep 2006 - 11:23
Outsourcing sucks so this is a step in the right direction. Lets now hope other companies will follow suit. I believe we should keep US companies employed in the US. (ie: take care of our own)
(1 reply) #8 yizuman on 22 Sep 2006 - 12:31
What about the US jobs with IBM and many others like it? IBM outsourced 18,000 jobs to India (mostly call centers).

I've heard of bills on the floor that would help ban jobs from being outsourced. Wonder what became of that?
#8.1 freeeekyyy on 23 Sep 2006 - 08:02
Quote - yizuman said @ #8
What about the US jobs with IBM and many others like it? IBM outsourced 18,000 jobs to India (mostly call centers).

I've heard of bills on the floor that would help ban jobs from being outsourced. Wonder what became of that?


Yeah, banning outsourcing seems like a bad idea. Companies will just move their headquarters to another country. The solution is to lower taxes. Businesses get taxed like crazy, for every employee. It's not even the wages that are the real killers. It's the taxes.
#9 xSuRgEx on 22 Sep 2006 - 13:47
Good move for AT&T lets hope others follow what they have done.
#10 Croquant on 22 Sep 2006 - 14:13
Yeah! Tech support personal that actually speak English! What a concept, AT&T!
(1 reply) #11 Qoogirl on 23 Sep 2006 - 08:21
Only 2,000 tech support jobs doesn't really seem like a huge number for a company like AT&T...

I don't care if the jobs are outsourced so much as I care if the people filling the jobs know what they're talking about. I talked to an American woman on the phone who had no clue about Cable or DSL or the script she was reading off of, and it drove me insane. She had a southern accent that I don't have, but I won't hold it against her as I will her not knowing a thing about the advice she was giving me.
#11.1 freeeekyyy on 24 Sep 2006 - 20:54
Quote - Qoogirl said @ #11
Only 2,000 tech support jobs doesn't really seem like a huge number for a company like AT&T...

I don't care if the jobs are outsourced so much as I care if the people filling the jobs know what they're talking about. I talked to an American woman on the phone who had no clue about Cable or DSL or the script she was reading off of, and it drove me insane. She had a southern accent that I don't have, but I won't hold it against her as I will her not knowing a thing about the advice she was giving me.



Well see, to a point that's right. But when you can't understand a single word the person is saying, it doesn't really matter how smart they are.


And yes, stupid tech support people are extremely annoying...along the same lines as the ones you can't understand.
#12 yert* on 24 Sep 2006 - 05:16
I think they should cut the executives salaries and divide the difference amongst the ****ing workers...Then there would be no need for outsourcing because all the money would still be saved.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)