Nah. This isn't the reason. The reasons to quality drops are economical / just a result of how anyone runs the place.
Here are some reasons why quality drops with foreign / powerless workers:
* Job is an asset. More so in poorer countries where even a low-paid US job makes a huge difference in terms of earnings in local currency. This is also, to a lesser degree what happens to visa workers. Fear to speak up. Fear to say anything that contradicts boss' plan. Losing a job like this has much more severe repercussions to the employee than if they were locals who can simply move on to another job just like the one they were fired from.
* Comprehension. No matter how good employee's English is, it's still the second language. It will make communication difficult. Beside the language, it's also often that employees who live in poorer countries have never seen either the equipment they are writing for, nor the customers who are going to use their products because simply don't exist in their countries. We rely on such shared experiences when we communicate the goals or when omitting details we even don't explicitly think about, while to the foreigners this could be completely unknown and unexpected.
* Work ethics are different between cultures. Vertical relationships in work hierarchies can be very different in different countries, which can easily prevent vital information from reaching its target. The desirable properties of employees are evaluated differently. Also, different cultures will have different ways to slack, which may not be easily recognizable to the other side.
----
In other words: it's hard to reliably transfer ideas (s.a. requirements, acceptance criteria, compensation etc.) across cultures, and this leads to failures. It's not necessary to put the blame on just one part of the team: both teams fail to communicate, and to ensure quality... but this also means that either teams' complaints are very legitimate and relate to some objective reality. Although some may start jumping to conclusions that try to explain this through racial stereotypes... actually trying to interpret the real problems through the scope of racial stereotype is what's bad about said stereotype.
The parent comment is about Amazon employees in India.
Your point #1 contradicts itself when you say "if they were locals who can simply move on to another job" --> Indians working India are the "locals" who can move onto another job. And Indian tech industry is very well developed, its not difficult to find another job, certainly not for those working in MAANG companies.
Entirely disagree with point #2, people can learn a language if they use it long enough. And Indians are no strangers to speaking multiple languages. The bilingual population of India exceeds the total population of US.
Its also extremely ignorant (maybe even racist) to suggest that people in India have not seen the equipment or the customers. Frankly, this is the most abhorrent part of your comment for me. Like I said, ignorance, hatred, and racism seeps through in any conversation.
Also, if a company care so much about quality of work, they can ship the equipment to India. Or does shipping not exist there either? Lastly, speaking of Amazon, which equipment is this exactly? Or what customers?
I somewhat agree with your point #3, but for a company like Amazon the hiring process is pretty much standardized. Its leetcode, leadership principles and system design for the higher levels. How much variation in evaluation can there be for such a standardized process?
> Although some may start jumping to conclusions that try to explain this through racial stereotypes...
And it needs to be called out. Unfortunately, it has become all to acceptable to be racist against Indians online. Even in channels like hacker news.
> Your point #1 contradicts itself when you say "if they were locals who can simply move on to another job"
OK, I need to clarify: another equivalent job. If you are local in the US, then all local jobs are "somewhat" equivalent (of course they are different, but they are within the same range). But, if you work in India (or any similar country) for an international company, or for the local Indian company -- that's a world of difference.
I'm not from India, but I know this situation from Eastern Europe. India wouldn't be very different in this regard.
Nah. This isn't the reason. The reasons to quality drops are economical / just a result of how anyone runs the place.
Here are some reasons why quality drops with foreign / powerless workers:
* Job is an asset. More so in poorer countries where even a low-paid US job makes a huge difference in terms of earnings in local currency. This is also, to a lesser degree what happens to visa workers. Fear to speak up. Fear to say anything that contradicts boss' plan. Losing a job like this has much more severe repercussions to the employee than if they were locals who can simply move on to another job just like the one they were fired from.
* Comprehension. No matter how good employee's English is, it's still the second language. It will make communication difficult. Beside the language, it's also often that employees who live in poorer countries have never seen either the equipment they are writing for, nor the customers who are going to use their products because simply don't exist in their countries. We rely on such shared experiences when we communicate the goals or when omitting details we even don't explicitly think about, while to the foreigners this could be completely unknown and unexpected.
* Work ethics are different between cultures. Vertical relationships in work hierarchies can be very different in different countries, which can easily prevent vital information from reaching its target. The desirable properties of employees are evaluated differently. Also, different cultures will have different ways to slack, which may not be easily recognizable to the other side.
----
In other words: it's hard to reliably transfer ideas (s.a. requirements, acceptance criteria, compensation etc.) across cultures, and this leads to failures. It's not necessary to put the blame on just one part of the team: both teams fail to communicate, and to ensure quality... but this also means that either teams' complaints are very legitimate and relate to some objective reality. Although some may start jumping to conclusions that try to explain this through racial stereotypes... actually trying to interpret the real problems through the scope of racial stereotype is what's bad about said stereotype.
The parent comment is about Amazon employees in India.
Your point #1 contradicts itself when you say "if they were locals who can simply move on to another job" --> Indians working India are the "locals" who can move onto another job. And Indian tech industry is very well developed, its not difficult to find another job, certainly not for those working in MAANG companies.
Entirely disagree with point #2, people can learn a language if they use it long enough. And Indians are no strangers to speaking multiple languages. The bilingual population of India exceeds the total population of US.
Its also extremely ignorant (maybe even racist) to suggest that people in India have not seen the equipment or the customers. Frankly, this is the most abhorrent part of your comment for me. Like I said, ignorance, hatred, and racism seeps through in any conversation.
Also, if a company care so much about quality of work, they can ship the equipment to India. Or does shipping not exist there either? Lastly, speaking of Amazon, which equipment is this exactly? Or what customers?
I somewhat agree with your point #3, but for a company like Amazon the hiring process is pretty much standardized. Its leetcode, leadership principles and system design for the higher levels. How much variation in evaluation can there be for such a standardized process?
> Although some may start jumping to conclusions that try to explain this through racial stereotypes...
And it needs to be called out. Unfortunately, it has become all to acceptable to be racist against Indians online. Even in channels like hacker news.
> Your point #1 contradicts itself when you say "if they were locals who can simply move on to another job"
OK, I need to clarify: another equivalent job. If you are local in the US, then all local jobs are "somewhat" equivalent (of course they are different, but they are within the same range). But, if you work in India (or any similar country) for an international company, or for the local Indian company -- that's a world of difference.
I'm not from India, but I know this situation from Eastern Europe. India wouldn't be very different in this regard.
3 replies →