Companies that are more aware / experienced with the challenges of outsourcing software development to India often rely on an expensive middleman. These companies exist for one purpose, and really one purpose only, and that’s to legally traffic workers from India to the US in what many people call “modern slavery”, while maintaining a pool in India that they can overcharge the US clients for. Is it legal, yes, is it ethical, I’ll let you be the judge.
Here’s how it works:
Potential candidates are sold the dream of coming to the US to work for big companies making big money, and soon find themselves chained to desks in situations where there are cases of HR and labor law violations by US standards like not paying for hours worked, and even questionable business practices like sending workers home to India for 1 month a year to avoid taxes.
How is that legal, you might ask… IT’S NOT. How do they get away with it, you might also ask… because they threaten the workers from India that they will be sent back to India if they say anything.
Further, the culture follows a fairly strict hierarchical system where you are to never question someone above you in a company, and this is clearly exploited for profits by the managers of these companies.
If you read the reviews, like the ones below on glassdoor.com from former employees, you can see a clear trend in this type of business model:
“Overworked and underpaid”
Cons
– Long hours
– Lower than industry pay
– Management keeps changing direction
– Health care benefits are expensive
“Very poorly managed organization”
Cons
Most of the time one is working with untrained jr. associates who are struggling and are not motivated. The organization does not hire for talent. No career progression. A lack of professional project execution methodologies. Poor value to the client. Severe lack of work life balance. Extreme politics. Frequent indiscriminate behaviors on the part of “Sr. Leadership.”
“Awful Experience”
Cons
– No people development
– VERY Political
– No real training, the management will tell you to crack exams by studying cheat-sheets
– Billing as much as possible and work as little as possible
– You have no say in career direction
– Staffing wrong people at the wrong place
– Recruits anyone with a remote experience in IT and project management
– VP and leads do unethical things to bill more
– Below average salary and bonus
– Bad 401k matching
– Little holiday
– High turnover rate (~25%)
– Everyone that came on-board and everyone I know at the company thinks of leaving at some point
– Politics: Everyone holds secret agenda
“Ineffective leadership + unclear position in market = few projects sold + stunted career development”
Cons
Your success at the firm and ability to get on projects is predicated entirely on networking and getting in the good graces of certain leaders, not about your skills or the quality of your work.
Company has shifted direction 5 or 6 times in the roughly 3 years that I’ve been with the firm and they still don’t have a clear GTM strategy, which has hurt the firm’s management consulting brand. Still known nationwide primarily as an IT firm.
This firm has lost a lot of good, bright people, who’ve found greener pastures elsewhere. Almost everybody I know at Capgemini intends to leave as soon as they get the chance. I personally am just biding my time until I can get something better. I strongly recommend that people joining this firm reconsider their decision.
“Internationally incompetent”
Cons
They have terrible unstructured solutions for their clients. They attempt to do as little as possible to accomplish the job.
“One of the worst 2nd tier consulting firms.”
Cons
– No projects in pipeline
– Finance practice is in near collapse
– HR department unethical
– Bench time exceeds 2-3 months. Half of the practice on bench.
“Depends if you are hired in us or from india. if you are hired from india and moved to US, LIFE IS BAD.”
Cons
Depends if you are hired in us or from India. if you are hired from India and moved to US, LIFE IS BAD. There is nothing called work life balance.
“Big Name very little scope for individual growth”
Cons
– No Scope for Individual Growth
– Bureaucratic with top down format
– Focused on billing client to enhance revenue and not on providing client value
So how in the world knowing all of this are well known US companies using companies like this? That’s simple, on paper it looks cheaper; the key there is on paper.
SpicyMicrowave.com 