UK banking giant HSBC is cutting up to 3,500 head office and other UK support role jobs to cut costs.
At the same time, the bank, which made a record profit of 6.9bn ($12.8bn) in 2003, is to take on an extra 1,000 staff across its UK branch network.
Five hundred of the jobs which are being cut in the UK will move to HSBC's call-centres in India and Malaysia.
More at
So surely these jobs are not actually being cut.
I am sure you would feel wonderful about an internal transfer to Mumbai when an employer offers it to you then! Oh and BTW, that comes with a 20,000 pay cut from your annual pay!
Perhaps HSBCs total workforce no will not decrease but that does not change the fact that many HSBC staff will lose their jobs HERE!
MC
was there not a case in america where it seemed that out sourcing banks confidential data had serious repercussions when the foreign workers then blackmailed the banks customers direct? frankly, I dont like the idea of somebody 7000 miles away knowing intimate details about my finances. :-(
was there not a case in america where it seemed that out sourcing banks confidential data had serious repercussions when the foreign workers then blackmailed the banks customers direct? frankly, I dont like the idea of somebody 7000 miles away knowing intimate details about my finances. :-(
Do people in the UK have some God-given entitlement to jobs, whereas people in India and Malaysia don't?
No, but employers in this country have the moral obligation to employ people here and help our economy, not the Indian one. It doesn't happen the other way round, does it?
Actually - there are lots of cases where it does - especially with lots of foreign companies buying/owning more companies in Europe..
An employer is an employer whereever they "employ" people - nothing to do with moral obligations
Regards Sunil
It's interesting that you consider that the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank should have more loyalty to people in Britain than elsewhere.
My original point was merely raising the question of language. If a job in Leeds is being replaced by a job in India then surely the job is not being lost but taken from one person and given to another. I have a great deal of sympathy for the person in Leeds and none for a bank that cares little for its employees. We all know what the bank will do in a few years time when somewhere like China can undercut the call centres in India.
Ignoring the innate aggressiveness of the question, no - of course there is no god-given entitlement to jobs to citizens of the UK.
I acknowledge the benefit to companies of having staff outside of the UK fulfilling cust service roles, due to the lower salary & NI costs and no requirement to provide staff 'benefits' as we have come to expect in the UK (pensions, healthcare, etc); but feel to threaten redundancy to UK staff who have served a company well in favour of outsourced staff is somewhat unscrupulous.
If the company was, for example, a Malaysian corporation with an outsourced London office, and looking to relocate from UK to Malaysia then I would deem that a fair and sensible strategic move.
However, HSBC is a FTSE listed and London based corporation and hence feel that outsourcing in this manner betrays it's own 'home' workforce. If I were to be made redundant in this manner, I would certainly feel short-changed by my employer.
MC
HSBC (UK) certainly has more loyalty to it's staff in the UK than those in India and/or Malaysia!
HSBC is only named after the group's founding member the HSBC bank which was set up (I am sure someone will correct me if my history is inaccurate!!) by two merchant bankers from London who wished to set up a bank to more easily facilitate trade between China and London, as well as other european states.
It is not, by any estimation a Hong Kong or Shanghai BASED bank!!!! HSBC trades on four exchanges, and is based in London, but in many ways all of this is a little irrelevant........
When we talk about UK job losses, within the context of HSBC, we are essentially referring to losses from a UK bank which (despite the slick 'international' advertising) does have an ethical obligation to it's staff here.
MC
"Marcus Collie" wrote in message news:cav8mp$j6k$1$ snipped-for-privacy@news.demon.co.uk
HSBC was originally set up by a Scottish person who was working in Hong Kong as the Superintendent for the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company.
The first office and HSBC's HQ was Hong Kong in March 1865 and in Shanghai a month later.
From HSBC's web site:
"The new bank's commitment to local ownership and management required a special arrangement for incorporation. Rather than operate under existing British or colonial regulations - which would have required a London head office - the bank's directors persuaded the Treasury in London to accept incorporation under a special Hong Kong ordinance. This allowed the bank to maintain a head office in Hong Kong without losing the privilege of issuing banknotes and holding government funds. In this way, the bank (which had started life under a local Companies Ordinance as the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Company Limited) assumed the name The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in December 1866."
A London office was opened in July 1865.
HSBC Holding PLC (a new holding company) was created in 1991 and the holding companies HQ was moved to London in 1993.
Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation's HQ is still in HK.
At least 5 exchanges now..
Regards Sunil
Well, as I intimated, I was sure someone would correct my history!!
Sunil, by any chance do you work for HSBC - just wondering given the content of several of your posts!?
MC
"Marcus Collie" wrote in message news:cavrpe$npl$1$ snipped-for-privacy@news.demon.co.uk
Nope :)
Regards Sunil
Come on - you can downsize now before the property bubble bursts and live like an emperor out there,,,
Sorry if I sounded aggressive, I did not intend to.
Its only in recent years that HSBC moved its headquarters to London from Hong Kong. Prior to that, they were considering locations other than London to move to, such as Bermuda. Perhaps you wouldn't feel so short-changed if they had never moved to London in the first place, in which case there would have been no jobs to move. Don't forget that HSBC's roots are in Asia, and the vast majority of its business is there. It seems reasonable that most of their employees should be there too.
Apparently not. Their loyalty is to pounds and pence (and rupees).
As far as most UK citizens are concerned, it is the new name for the former Midland Bank, and as such it is very British. I do not know if the majority of their business is in Asia or not, and frankly don't care. What matters to me is that they are one of the UK's "Big Four", and have a huge presence here, they therefore should employ people here, and help the economy that makes them such huge profits. Why not go one further, scrap the call centres, and let people call their local branch? It used to work very well, and you dealt with people who knew you.
In message , Chris Blunt writes
In effect HSBC are transferring UK employees of HSBC UK (formerly Midland Bank) out of the country. Their work undertaken in UK was to service the UK business and once exported, those jobs will continue to serve their UK client base and will not be part of its international operation.
What seems to have been missed in this thread is the creation of 1000 uk branch based jobs.
In message , Sunil Sood writes
It is only The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited which has its Prinipal Office in Hong Kong. It is a subsidiary of HSBC Holdings Limited which has its HQ in London. Ultimately HSBC regards itself as now being based in London since the Chinese lease expired.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.