Reply to: Training offshore resources

[DimPrawn]

Ask a plumber or skilled builder to come round and teach you how to build extensions, so you can take his job, then pickup your teeth on the way out.

[silverlight1]

Think you should be able to play the Professional Indemnity card here.

"Much as I'd love to, I'm afraid that I can't train these guys as I'm not a trainer and my PI wouldn't cover work outside my specialism"

Training people is a skill in its own right.

Handover is different.

I've seen people take this tongue in cheek and design "tests" for the offshore teams to pass (which is course they fail).

It's then argued that the "training" be extended.

On the other hand watching offshore muppets make a hash of your work needs thick skin - but as a hardened contractor this should be second nature.

[fidot]

Think you should be able to play the Professional Indemnity card here.

"Much as I'd love to, I'm afraid that I can't train these guys as I'm not a trainer and my PI wouldn't cover work outside my specialism"

[washed up contractor]

Disagree totally. We are not in business to create competitors, especially ones that are going to undercut our rates. If your client wants to take on people with no skills in the job, that's their concern; it's not up to you to convert them.

Personally I wouldn't worry about upping your rate if there's other work reliably out there. Just say no and walk away as soon as you can; you'll be out in a matter of months anyway.

Totally agree (for once!). It pisses me off no end when clients try to do this. 'Oh, can you just train these excessive cheap bods in your hard to find \ premium rate skill so we can bin you off and have excessively cheapo bods do your job instead?'

There's a difference between training people how to use their own systems but asking contractors to cross train their bods in your specialism \ skills is entirely different.

[uk contractor]

OP walk away ASAP if you can land another role. Your 6-9 months remaining contract length will not be honoured once the new resource are even able to do a fraction of what you do now. Seen this happen so many times as well the 6-9 months is just the end clients insurance policy they will already have discussed your contract remaining length as the new resource are most likely being subsidised by the outsourcer until they can replace you!

[tomtomagain]

Glad to see UK PLC is bringing in qualified resources to plug a skills gap. Oh wait, they are bringing in unskilled resources and expecting you to train them before you leave.

[SussexSeagull]

If you are confident of getting another contract I would be tempted to wind your current one down and find something else as it is obviously has a limited shelf life and you are not that keen on doing the training.

[BR14]

The best is when everything is documented but they don't read the documents.

They do something wrong and you can go "It's on page X of the document. "

if only that actually worked

[SueEllen]

And after you’ve trained them and they are still tulip who’s at fault? The outsourcer will blame the training.
TCS always have a reason for being tulip and it’s never TCS’s fault.

The best is when everything is documented but they don't read the documents.

They do something wrong and you can go "It's on page X of the document. "

[Lance]

Let the client find someone else to do the training.

What I've observed working with off-shore resources in certain countries as soon as the intelligent ones grasp what they have to do, they are off somewhere else to get better pay leaving you with the idiots to deal with. Then the client gets fed up of the work being broken due to the continual change in personnel so dumps them for another out sourcer.

And after you’ve trained them and they are still tulip who’s at fault? The outsourcer will blame the training.
TCS always have a reason for being tulip and it’s never TCS’s fault.

[tpsman]

This would specifically be training, not just handover of the work I've done, as the skills to work in the product require some knowledge of the business area and extensive product knowledge.

[SueEllen]

We don't know the details of the offshore team, and we don't need to be a racist bigot here.

I deliberately didn't mention any countries by name so any bigoted views are in your own mind.

[northernladuk]

We don't know the details of the offshore team, and we don't need to be a racist bigot here.

I don't think she's being racist. Just pointing out some people with English as a second language and are thick as mince are mind numbingly tedious to deal with. A point you are backing up admirably I may add.

[Bee]

Let the client find someone else to do the training.

What I've observed working with off-shore resources in certain countries as soon as the intelligent ones grasp what they have to do, they are off somewhere else to get better pay leaving you with the idiots to deal with. Then the client gets fed up of the work being broken due to the continual change in personnel so dumps them for another out sourcer.

We don't know the details of the offshore team, and we don't need to be a racist bigot here.

[SueEllen]

I understand your point but it's not the right direction.

If the OP refuses to train the team, the client will find another resource to train them. If there is a lot of work in the field I don't see an option that will put the OP in a bad position and lose the client possibility forever.

The better option for this would be increasing the rate, not the double but a good percentage depending if is long or short-term training.

If you have afraid of the competition be the best at it.

Let the client find someone else to do the training.

What I've observed working with off-shore resources in certain countries as soon as the intelligent ones grasp what they have to do, they are off somewhere else to get better pay leaving you with the idiots to deal with. Then the client gets fed up of the work being broken due to the continual change in personnel so dumps them for another out sourcer.