[shrikant]

This isn't upvoted enough.

While the general sentiment of the article is true enough (I suffered an academic path not too different from magic_haze - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2412098 - above), the specific example of the call-centre in question cannot be used as a valid premise.

They want "new recruits who can answer questions by phone and email.", and also in all likelihood want to pay a pittance for this. Sample the following quote:

Its increasing difficulty finding competent employees in India has forced the company to expand its search to the Philippines and Nicaragua. Most of its 8,000 employees are now based outside of India.

s/competent/cheap there, and you have the reality. I doubt if fresh college grads from Nicaragua or Philippines are on average more 'employable' or 'competent' than those from India. In fact, if a fresh college grad is able to competently answer questions by phone and/or email with a modicum of communication skills, they're arguably better off not getting employed in such a job.

[potatolicious]

Kind of. If the call center started paying dramatically more, it would solve its hiring problems overnight. In fact, customer service quality would go through the roof as IIT grads and extremely smart folk joined.

Then Google, IBM, et al in India would be starving for talent.

On a micro scale you are correct - the hiring problems are a function of how much they are willing to pay. But that's not really the crux of the problem - the problem is that, on any pay scale, the supply of competent/qualified people is smaller than the demand.

That's the way I've experienced it in the US anyhow. If you want a software engineer and are willing to pony up a lot of cash, you will find someone good. This doesn't change the fact that the supply pool is still woefully undersized relative to the demand.

[pessimizer]

My disagreement with this perspective is that demand is measured in dollars, not desire. The perception of a problem in the supply pool is a problem with the quality expectation (or need) per dollar of salary, rather than a problem in the workforce itself.

I think that programming is just at a difficulty level where employers really either have to spend the money, or realize that their business model really isn't viable if it depends on a large supply of competent $36K programmers.