Re:

Concerning #2 and recruiter shops.  Once upon a time I worked on a year long
contract.  It was one of those contracts where you work pretty much 24 hours
a day.  I personally brought in 3 more consultants to work on the project.
Of course this was through my agency.  After this was all said and done, I
calculated the the extra money that the four of us made our recruiting
office (only the amount over 40hrs/wk) and it was enough to let me quite
working for the next 4 years.  Did I get any of this, No.  Well they let me
stay on the bench for about 3 months.  But really I am the one who stays up
half the night and weekends educating myself while they fly off on vacations
drinking umbrella drinks.  I want a service that opens there books.  I
appreciate the service that recruiting companies give us.  I think that the
agencies should get rich.  But I don't think they should get rich off of
just one person.



  _____  

From: Unmoderated DOTNET job forum [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Guha, Rahul
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 9:51 AM
To: [email protected]


This is an interesting discussion . although thought NOT to join this
because essentially this is NOT a discussion forum but a job posting thread
. but can't resist the temptation. Here are my two cents:
 
1.      In my opinion, we all are experiencing a subtle but interesting
shift in software development philosophy. The Companies are moving away from
developing custom software and skewing towards buying off the shelf products
and customize them per their requirements. This is terrible for people like
us (who do in house development) . but probably from company's perspective
it is useful. Nowadays most of the functional business requirements are been
catered by some kind of software packages and they come for pretty less
price. That obviously lure the companies. But in many cases, there are
hidden cost of Consultant Hours and other charges which finally drive up the
TCO. Which one finally pays off .? Not sure .. but surely this reduces the
requirement of very highly skilled in-house s/w developers for many of the
requirements. It boils down to integrating between pieces of components
which although not trivial . but in most cases doesn't need huge
architecture / design type work. That's why my nine years of OO experience
probably become little bit "over qualification" for such work. Add recent
trend of off-shoring various development jobs.
Probably skills are moving towards product development companies who deliver
these tools.
 
2.       Resume' manipulation was always a problem and I have seen it for H1
and non-H1s . It's a question of attitude . H1s had their contribution in
developing this economy as well as internet boom in late nineties. They were
part of lots of phenomenal development initiatives. And there are abuses
too. But if you look through . people who always made money out of it was
the recruiters and the sweat shops . We all know the usual ratio of the
recruiting job shops use to make and to their H1s were paid (it use to be
around 60 to 40 ratio) . And . they were NOT H1s . 
The only point I want to make is . we all should be very much aware of these
recruiters who make their living out of somebody else's intellectual asset
and almost control the price of that at their will. 
I think it is outrageous to ask for Tech. Lead for VS.Net in NYC for 50K per
year . 
I am still waiting to see his rationale (if there is any) and comments on
that .
 
 
Rahul Guha
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Coward [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 9:15 AM
To: [email protected]
 
Reply,
 
I'll agree with Larry but a business movement is the last thing we will see
(IMHO).  Companies maintain H1B relationships and others because of the
corporate tax liability...basically there is none.  To conduct business this
way only exploits and overcasts the bottom line the companies report because
the taxes not paid are transferred as earnings.  This is the legal loophole
that Enron, WorldCom, and others tried to exploit to pad their bottom line.
But it is conclusive that the practice of hiring less than capable
programmers will cause a rift that company administrators won't see until
they have a black eye.
 
My opinion is that this degradation on the job market has been perpetuated
by recruiters who exclude competent programming skills and experience almost
to the point of age discrimination.  When your told your over qualified to
use VB. Net in VS 2003 someone has some very crossed wires.
 
If you have watched other sectors you will note some interesting
characteristics.  As a carpenter that later invested the education to enter
the industry as a 1982 IBM Sys36 Cobol and Fortran programmer, I now make
more money doing the finish trim on a custom home than any offer I've seen
in two years as a programmer.
 
Don't think that there is recovery anytime soon.  All indicators point to
programming being a $35K to $42K industry on average if recruiters are
allowed to continue there segregating grip on corporate HR.  We as US
citizens will further endure excessive tax liability because corporations
make these exploits and the W2 worker pays for more gorged budgets.
 
So what is the outcome.  Incorporate, maintain strict records so when your
taxes are filed the government gives you your next years operating capital
in the form of a refund.  If the job market was generating a correct index
then corporate earnings would out way the many, many deductions that
overwhelm revenues and lead to a phat corporate tax return.
 
I want to raise my earnings for next year, getting work is harder than
taking a loss for not getting the work.  A perpetual vacation instilled by
the present IT market that can generate a balanced P&L after the refund is
deposited.  On one hand it sux, but after your used to it you find it isn't
all that bad and you have plenty of time to read while those W2 workers
build the government coffers so I can get a good refund.
 
So hey everyone...work a little (4 months), then vacation (looking for work)
until your refunded all those expenses that took all operating capital and
extended your vacation.
 
 
Good luck
 
Bob Coward
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Unmoderated DOTNET job forum
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of David P. Brown
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 11:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET-JOBS]
 
 
Lighten up, please. I for one am enjoying this discussion.
 
Nice post, Larry. :)
 
David P. Brown
Sr. SQA Engineer
Kofax Image Products
Irvine, CA
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Unmoderated DOTNET job forum [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Christine Larsen
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 6:26 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET-JOBS]
 
this is not a discussion group but a job posting board
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry O'Brien [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 4:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET-JOBS]
 
 
> once the market picks up again, and it
> will, companies like this one will suffer tremendous turnover
 
Surely that's true, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they will go out of
business. To me, the overall market seems to be moving towards inexpensive
incompetence: under-specified, under-bid, and under-delivered projects. But
the monthly bill is less! I do not think software development professionals
have proved to business leaders that an understanding of software
development processes and practices translates into less expense in the long
run. Everyone on this list may know that the lessons of "The Mythical
Man-Month" still hold true, but does the average business leader? Or do they
think "Yeah, that's just the squawking of people who miss their foosball
tables and in-office massages"? I think that the gap between good software
development practices and average software development practices is growing
and I think that for that to change, there must be a movement in the
_business_ world, but if you read the business magazines or the
business-oriented software development magazines, this year's silver bullets
are outsourcing and cost control.
 
Just my depressed $.02 cents,
Larry
http://www.ThinkingIn.NET/