I was in the team that outsourced a couple of hundred people about 18 months ago. It was an IT development outsourcing.
Was it stupid? Yes and no. Some things are better, some things are different, probably not many are truly worse.
Up until the time I joined the outsourcing team, I was in-scope for the same outsourcing. I didn’t plan that, it was just that after I joined the team, it was made clear I couldn’t be outsourced at it would have been a conflict of interest. You know, chose the outsourced that suited me.
We outsourced both full time permanent staff and contractors.
One of the conditions of the outsourcing was guaranteed 12 months employment for the permanent staff and stuff all for the contractors.
The winning tenderer had a significant price advantage over the remainder, while their delivery capability was superior to one and about par with the other outsourcer, so we chose them. Not that that was the only criteria, but I’m simplifying here.
After the 18 months of the outsourcing, most of the contractors are gone. They were very well (over) paid before they got outsourced and the outsourcer decided they could save the cost by using lesser paid permanent staff, so there are a number of contractors who were offered permanent emplyment with the outsourcer once they got there, but they were in the minority.
After the 12 month guarantee period expired, the outsourcer went through the list of former employees like a dose of salts.
They cut everyone who wasn’t performing.
They cut a lot of people, who over time, had received very decent salary increases and therefore were at the top of their ‘pay scale’ for the type of work they did.
Those who were hard working people, who knew what they were doing and not grossly overpaid for their skills are still there.
Those who were underperforming and overpaid were cut, like they should have been before they were outsourced, but we were too chicken shit to take that accountability.
As such, the outsourcer is now very much leaner, meaner and focussed on the $ and delivery.
Are they doing a better job than was being done before the outsourcing. Arguably yes.
Are they cheaper than they were in-house. Arguably yes.
Will the guarantee of future employment be there should our funds dry up and we no longer require the same volume of work? Probably not which is part of the reason for outsourcing in that this no longer became our problem.
Would these people still have a job if they had refused a new role with the outsourcer. Hell NO. Categorically NO. In fact, nearly 100% of the people who did not take the new offer were retrenched within a couple of months.
Were I not part of the outsourcing team, I would have taken the new role with at least a 12 month guarantee and based on my (opinion) experience and ability, I like to think I would have been retained.
As it is, I am still working for the original company in a different role as before the outsourcing, but still utilising my same skill set.
I don’t know if that helps, but a guarantee of 12 months job would be better than being out of work. After all, you are being outsourced because we no longer require your skill here, so what would we do with you?
