3 ms·

I agree with you. I've spent few years being a mainframe monkey (support). I got out when I had the opportunity. I have seen how people in other countries are t

I agree with you. I've spent few years being a mainframe monkey (support). I got out when I had the opportunity. I have seen how people in other countries are taking on this role (of being mainframe monkeys) like there's nothing else in the world. This is mainly because they are cheap labor. While at the same time, the people in the States doing the same, are on the edge of their seats with minimum wage (ask MF operators). The high-end MF programmers are far and few. Most of them, are there in a unique position within any company (there are hardly two of the same kind within the same company). They are mostly pricks and aholes in themselves (because of their position, their ego makes them as such). But that's a side topic. Irrespective of what we see with the collaboration in educational field, the MF jobs are just not economically appealing enough for US graduates. Indians, Brazilians and Chinese, on the other hand, have that opportunity because American companies are getting them cheap comparatively.

nickpsecurity 11y ago
I think the distinction here between low and high-end MF operators may not be just that they're MF operators at certain experience level. At a number of companies, I've seen that the people on top have a thorough understanding of the applications the mainframe supports and are critical for making changes that don't break it. Not having them any more could make stuff stop working. So, it justifies their higher pay plus job security. You think that might be the case for the high-end MF operators in general?
- webwanderings 11y ago
  The good operators stay long, but they are still on the edge. And there's nobody whose going to tell you how valuable those good operators are for any company's day to day operations. But again, they are not equally valued. What ultimately matters: can the Indians do the job? The answer is yes. And that's where there is cost saving.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    I guess the job security is down to what my old pal told me. He was an embedded engineer partly because it was interesting and partly for job security. I asked what he meant about job security. He said his work needed people to physical be there, get the job done, and support it over time with quick, physical response if needed. Harder to offshore than code and only so many H1-B's they can do. So, he predicted we'd have a lot more to worry about. He seems right so far. Most of the embedded industry overseas is production or low-level stuff easy to hand off. There's usually someone like him over here involved in one or more parts of the process. Maybe I should've picked that market.
    - webwanderings 11y ago
      There are American companies out there who do not have to worry about H1-Bs because their whole business is being run from other countries. They just shift the workload altogether, with mid managers etc, leaving only the highest of the hierarchy in the US. As a low level tech, I have been through several offshoring where I have seen the whole local departments disappear, only to reemerge in another country with new sets of people. I managed to survive for some time because they could not offshore due to some government regulations. The truth is, American companies will offshore as much as they can. They have and they will. It is a simple case of increased profits due to cost-saving.
      - nickpsecurity 11y ago
        Makes sense.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

I think the distinction here between low and high-end MF operators may not be just that they're MF operators at certain experience level. At a number of companies, I've seen that the people on top have a thorough understanding of the applications the mainframe supports and are critical for making changes that don't break it. Not having them any more could make stuff stop working. So, it justifies their higher pay plus job security. You think that might be the case for the high-end MF operators in general?

webwanderings 11y ago
The good operators stay long, but they are still on the edge. And there's nobody whose going to tell you how valuable those good operators are for any company's day to day operations. But again, they are not equally valued. What ultimately matters: can the Indians do the job? The answer is yes. And that's where there is cost saving.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  I guess the job security is down to what my old pal told me. He was an embedded engineer partly because it was interesting and partly for job security. I asked what he meant about job security. He said his work needed people to physical be there, get the job done, and support it over time with quick, physical response if needed. Harder to offshore than code and only so many H1-B's they can do. So, he predicted we'd have a lot more to worry about. He seems right so far. Most of the embedded industry overseas is production or low-level stuff easy to hand off. There's usually someone like him over here involved in one or more parts of the process. Maybe I should've picked that market.
  - webwanderings 11y ago
    There are American companies out there who do not have to worry about H1-Bs because their whole business is being run from other countries. They just shift the workload altogether, with mid managers etc, leaving only the highest of the hierarchy in the US. As a low level tech, I have been through several offshoring where I have seen the whole local departments disappear, only to reemerge in another country with new sets of people. I managed to survive for some time because they could not offshore due to some government regulations. The truth is, American companies will offshore as much as they can. They have and they will. It is a simple case of increased profits due to cost-saving.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      Makes sense.