Why is Amicus then opposed to outsourcing when it makes for such a strong economic argument for companies?
Amicus is not opposed to outsourcing. The companies involved are currently making a profit but are being wooed by threats that their share price will go into tailspin unless they offshore. We want offshoring and technological change to be managed transparently so that no one national economy benefits wholly at the expense of another. There is already evidence that jobs are being offshored from India to China. The true costs of offshoring are hidden from companies by offshore providers and consultancies who stand to make small fortunes from the process. It is not enough to talk about substantial wage cuts, the alternative business case shows hidden costs incurred through, training, relocation costs, travel costs, infrastructure development and maintenance and rising wage bills and turn over of staff. There are further issues around corporate social responsibility and dignity at work where UK companies seek to cut costs by exporting stressful conditions out of the UK. How is Amicus tryin
- How will companies know about the Metro Denver GIS GIS site? How is the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation marketing it?
- What are the key benefits that companies can achieve through outsourcing and in reality, are they ever realized?
- Why is outsourcing a key area of focus for large companies?