Утечка интеллектуальной работы из США. В Россию.
OUTSOURCING THE FRIENDLY SKIES
Outsourcing.
It's the buzzword of the day. As the U.S. increasingly exports its manufacturing jobs offshore, a fierce debate has erupted across the political spectrum.
In general, conservatives praise outsourcing for the benefits they believe are self-evident: the increased efficiency it brings to American corporations, the resulting lower product prices that are passed on to consumers, and the positive response of the stock market (and shareholders) to fattened bottom lines. But liberals tend to decry it for its perceived cost: the shifting of American enterprise to foreign countries,
the wholesale laying-off of indigenous workers, and the abuses that are characteristic of ultra-cheap, unregulated, corrupt labor markets.
The pros and cons can, no doubt, be debated endlessly without any consensus emerging.
Yet, there is a more fundamental question, one that is seldom, if ever, raised during the war of words. Is there a point at which outsourcing becomes demonstrably detrimental, both to a company that practices it, and to the nation? We believe that the answer is an obvious yes, if it compromises public safety.
Could that be the case already? Could it be happening with Boeing, which has stood for decades as an American icon, a company that designed and built the finest commercial aircraft in the world?
_____________________________________________________________
We don't know for sure, but we have recently become aware of a highly disturbing document that is circulating on the Internet. For the most part, we remain skeptical of unverifiable Net rumors.
Yet, the Internet has proven in the past to be an important source of material from people who are denied access to our increasingly controlled mainstream media.
In this instance, we believe the issues raised in the document are too critical to let it quietly die without further exposure.
The document's authors purport to be a group of Boeing engineers who, fearing for their job security, must remain anonymous.
"Recently," they write, "there has been much attention focused on the 'Boeing brain drain' that may have contributed to the loss of the Shuttle Columbia. However, most people do not realize that a similar 'brain drain' is occurring within the Commercial Airplane division of Boeing."
This is not a matter of children making Nike sneakers or Kathy Lee clothing.
It's a matter of Russian engineers designing aircraft to which we entrust our lives. Yes, Russian. As the company itself announced in an August 2001 press release, the Boeing Design Center in Moscow will work in cooperation with Ilyushin, the leading Russian aircraft manufacturer, "to train up to 50 Russian engineers a month."
The Russians, according to the American group, have intelligence and education. What they don't have are: experience designing airplanes, sufficient English to carry on technical conversations, and initiative and creativity, squashed by decades of harsh Communist rule.
These are rather significant shortfalls.
The document goes on to state that the
"initial results of the quality of work from BDC/Moscow are frightening. Much ... has had to be completely re-done. Changes that were supposed to be made aren't made properly, and changes that shouldn't have been made are widespread. Luckily, there have been enough experienced Boeing engineers to catch these errors. This is no longer the case..."
Designing viable aircraft - where errors tend to be unforgiving - is a very lengthy, exceedingly complicated proposition. Much depends on knowledge which is gained only through years, or decades, of hands-on experience. That kind of experience, formerly passed on through personal contact, is also being lost. The engineering staff at Boeing/USA, depleted by layoffs and accelerating retirements due to the "graying" of the workforce, is replaced by foreigners who barely speak the language.
"Boeing is rapidly approaching 'the point of no return,'" the American engineers contend, where "knowledge and engineering ability has [sic] been irrecoverably lost."
Are the authors of this document really Boeing engineers and, if so, are they merely disgruntled? Or are they what they claim to be, honorable whistleblowers who would alert us to a problem that could eventually lead to a disaster for Boeing and a possible loss of lives?
We can't know the answer until the story receives a lot more attention than it has up to now. While we believe the chances are slim that Boeing will let its engineering degrade to the point that its jets begin falling out of the sky, there should be concern that our major corporations have felt the need to look overseas for highly skilled engineers. It is not just economics, though at wages that can be 1/12th that of American engineers, that is certainly a factor... supply can be a factor as well.
A study sponsored by the National Science Foundation found that only 41.1 percent of the doctorates awarded by U.S. universities in 2001 went to U.S. citizens. Further confirmation was provided by Stan Williams, the director of Hewlett-Packard's nanotechnology laboratory, who recently commented that no one in his lab under the age of 45 is an American.
Outsourcing.
It's the buzzword of the day. As the U.S. increasingly exports its manufacturing jobs offshore, a fierce debate has erupted across the political spectrum.
In general, conservatives praise outsourcing for the benefits they believe are self-evident: the increased efficiency it brings to American corporations, the resulting lower product prices that are passed on to consumers, and the positive response of the stock market (and shareholders) to fattened bottom lines. But liberals tend to decry it for its perceived cost: the shifting of American enterprise to foreign countries,
the wholesale laying-off of indigenous workers, and the abuses that are characteristic of ultra-cheap, unregulated, corrupt labor markets.
The pros and cons can, no doubt, be debated endlessly without any consensus emerging.
Yet, there is a more fundamental question, one that is seldom, if ever, raised during the war of words. Is there a point at which outsourcing becomes demonstrably detrimental, both to a company that practices it, and to the nation? We believe that the answer is an obvious yes, if it compromises public safety.
Could that be the case already? Could it be happening with Boeing, which has stood for decades as an American icon, a company that designed and built the finest commercial aircraft in the world?
_____________________________________________________________
We don't know for sure, but we have recently become aware of a highly disturbing document that is circulating on the Internet. For the most part, we remain skeptical of unverifiable Net rumors.
Yet, the Internet has proven in the past to be an important source of material from people who are denied access to our increasingly controlled mainstream media.
In this instance, we believe the issues raised in the document are too critical to let it quietly die without further exposure.
The document's authors purport to be a group of Boeing engineers who, fearing for their job security, must remain anonymous.
"Recently," they write, "there has been much attention focused on the 'Boeing brain drain' that may have contributed to the loss of the Shuttle Columbia. However, most people do not realize that a similar 'brain drain' is occurring within the Commercial Airplane division of Boeing."
This is not a matter of children making Nike sneakers or Kathy Lee clothing.
It's a matter of Russian engineers designing aircraft to which we entrust our lives. Yes, Russian. As the company itself announced in an August 2001 press release, the Boeing Design Center in Moscow will work in cooperation with Ilyushin, the leading Russian aircraft manufacturer, "to train up to 50 Russian engineers a month."
The Russians, according to the American group, have intelligence and education. What they don't have are: experience designing airplanes, sufficient English to carry on technical conversations, and initiative and creativity, squashed by decades of harsh Communist rule.
These are rather significant shortfalls.
The document goes on to state that the
"initial results of the quality of work from BDC/Moscow are frightening. Much ... has had to be completely re-done. Changes that were supposed to be made aren't made properly, and changes that shouldn't have been made are widespread. Luckily, there have been enough experienced Boeing engineers to catch these errors. This is no longer the case..."
Designing viable aircraft - where errors tend to be unforgiving - is a very lengthy, exceedingly complicated proposition. Much depends on knowledge which is gained only through years, or decades, of hands-on experience. That kind of experience, formerly passed on through personal contact, is also being lost. The engineering staff at Boeing/USA, depleted by layoffs and accelerating retirements due to the "graying" of the workforce, is replaced by foreigners who barely speak the language.
"Boeing is rapidly approaching 'the point of no return,'" the American engineers contend, where "knowledge and engineering ability has [sic] been irrecoverably lost."
Are the authors of this document really Boeing engineers and, if so, are they merely disgruntled? Or are they what they claim to be, honorable whistleblowers who would alert us to a problem that could eventually lead to a disaster for Boeing and a possible loss of lives?
We can't know the answer until the story receives a lot more attention than it has up to now. While we believe the chances are slim that Boeing will let its engineering degrade to the point that its jets begin falling out of the sky, there should be concern that our major corporations have felt the need to look overseas for highly skilled engineers. It is not just economics, though at wages that can be 1/12th that of American engineers, that is certainly a factor... supply can be a factor as well.
A study sponsored by the National Science Foundation found that only 41.1 percent of the doctorates awarded by U.S. universities in 2001 went to U.S. citizens. Further confirmation was provided by Stan Williams, the director of Hewlett-Packard's nanotechnology laboratory, who recently commented that no one in his lab under the age of 45 is an American.