Comments for Quality Engineering Career News by UQSI http://uqsi.com/blog A Blog dedicated to AS9100, TS16949, and ISO9000 Quality Engineering experts Sun, 03 May 2009 20:06:23 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Aerospace Engineering Searches for New Talent by Gregory Van Tighem http://uqsi.com/blog/2009/04/aerospace-engineering-searches-for-new-talent/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Gregory Van Tighem Sun, 03 May 2009 20:06:23 +0000 http://uqsi.com/blog/2009/04/22/aerospace-engineering-searches-for-new-talent/#comment-8 Yesterday, May 1, 2009, I was channel surfing and came across this panel discussion that was put together by University of Washington School of Engineering students. The discussion featured a few individuals, including a vice president of engineering from Boeing. I don't recall his name or the names of the other panelists. But essentially, the panelists were urging that the Washington Legislature make higher education funding a priority because companies like Boeing will need to replace the many engineers who will and already have reached retirement age. First, let me say, I don't necessarily disagree with that assessment. However, let me make a few observations that takes a slightly more counter point of view. First, as a Boeing stockholder, why would I want Boeing to spend more of my money hiring engineers in the United States, or perhaps more specifically, here in Washington state, at a substantially higher cost, when the company could hire them elsewhere (Russia, India or Missouri) and have the work done there at a cheaper cost? And two, as a Washington state taxpayer, why would I want to pay higher taxes to make investments in higher education, when companies like Boeing are likely to succumb to the enormous pressures to move jobs and factories to places where they can get the work done cheaper? Yesterday, May 1, 2009, I was channel surfing and came across this panel discussion that was put together by University of Washington School of Engineering students. The discussion featured a few individuals, including a vice president of engineering from Boeing. I don’t recall his name or the names of the other panelists. But essentially, the panelists were urging that the Washington Legislature make higher education funding a priority because companies like Boeing will need to replace the many engineers who will and already have reached retirement age. First, let me say, I don’t necessarily disagree with that assessment. However, let me make a few observations that takes a slightly more counter point of view.

First, as a Boeing stockholder, why would I want Boeing to spend more of my money hiring engineers in the United States, or perhaps more specifically, here in Washington state, at a substantially higher cost, when the company could hire them elsewhere (Russia, India or Missouri) and have the work done there at a cheaper cost?

And two, as a Washington state taxpayer, why would I want to pay higher taxes to make investments in higher education, when companies like Boeing are likely to succumb to the enormous pressures to move jobs and factories to places where they can get the work done cheaper?

]]>