Wholistic Engineers

Date: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 4:05 PM

JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER

January 10, 2006 No. 1398

Kristina M. Johnson, the dean of the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke
University, wrote an op-ed recently that appears at first glance to show
that American schools graduate enough engineers to compete with China and
India. The op-ed quickly goes downhill from there. Further into the article
she pushes the "education button" to make the point that the U.S. is going
to have a dangerous shortage of engineers. According to Johnson our K-12
schools just aren't preparing enough kids to embark on science and
engineering careers.

Johnson contradicts herself, but it might not be obvious unless you get
suspicious about her claim that what companies really want nowadays are
"holistic" engineers.

Companies are keen to hire students who have a holistic
perspective of their field, are able to integrate knowledge
across the disciplines, work well in teams, possess persuasive
communication skills, and have respect and an understanding
of other cultures. Such "dynamic engineers" also may possess
leadership skills. And you don't outsource leadership.

I decided to email Johnson just to get an idea of what exactly she means by
holistic. My email message to her follows, as well as a paraphrased
response back from her. She refused to give me permission to quote her, but
I guarantee that her paraphrased response is very close to what she
actually wrote. The letter from GW that I'm referring to appears after
Johnson's op-ed.

To Ms. Johnson,

> I agree with GW's letter, however he didn't point out another huge
> error in your op-ed: "Companies are keen to hire students who have a
> holistic perspective of their field". This is pure balderdash that
> companies use as an excuse not to hire American engineers.
> Companies want specific skillsets now, not holistic engineers.
> The fact that you
> repeated this industry flim flam indicates to me that you probably
> haven't looked for a private sector job for at least ten years.

Response back from Ms. Johnson:

I stand firmly behind my statements about holistic engineers. I have talked
to many of America's top CEOs, and all of them told me that they want
holistic, or "dynamic" engineers. I know what the real world is about
because I have started many companies that employ engineers. Not only that,
I sit on the corporate boards of several Fortune 500 companies. I know how
these companies hire and what they look for. I am personally interested in
making sure that all my students get great technical and non-technical
jobs.

Sincerely,
Kristina Johnson

Johnson is correct about one thing - academia and the CEOs of America are
jumping on this "holistic" thing. Apparently engineers not only need to
have the "skill of the day" such as working experience in the newest
software version, but they also have to have an extensive background in
psychology, sociology, marketing, mass communications, and of course it
doesn't hurt if they have an MBA on top of their MSEE. Since engineers are
required to have all of these soft skills nowadays, and it will take about
187 years to learn all of this stuff, perhaps we should be calling this new
breed "wholistic engineers" since to get a job they will be required to be
experts in every discipline that universities can charge for classes.

Doing a little googling turned up this definition of wholistic engineers by
my favorite Dean of Engineering:

http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/11/22/41a1f53e3673d

As all engineers understand, companies could care less about
the touchy-feely thinks that Johnson feels engineers need.
Employers want specific skill sets, not engineers that are

By now you are probably thinking that Ms. Johnson is just an isolated
example of a CEO that got trapped in an Ivory Tower. Unfortunately she is
more main stream than you might think. Here are some real gems from Richard
Miller, president of engineering at Olin College (I don't know if he is
related to Harris Miller, but it wouldn't surprise me considering this
piece of stupidity that was printed in the Sacramento Bee).

First Olin resorts to the hackneyed corporate "team work" thing:

Employers today are seeking tech wizards who can analyze
how projects will affect the bottom line, motivate teams
to work toward common goals, collaborate with complementary
businesses and understand their needs and motivations.

These whizzes could find themselves imbedded with mainstream
business units, from banking to insurance to finance and retail.

Here comes the dreaded "people skills" thing.

"The people skills needed to work overseas are more important than
ever before," [Olin College of Engineering president Richard] Miller
continues. "Our graduates have to learn to be willing to
accommodate and not offend.

Apparently Olin Miller and Ms. Johnson talked to the same CEOs:

"When I talk to CEOs from industry, they say they will
observe young engineers that reach a career plateau
relatively early, usually within about five years," says
Richard Miller, president of the Olin College of
Engineering in Needham, Massachusetts. "It is not because
they are deficient in some technical way. Instead, it
is because they have problems in relationships with people.

I decided to check if Duke University practices what Ms. Johnson preaches.
Perhaps I have been away from engineering academia too long and don't
understand the new generation of wholistic engineers.

The undergraduate guide almost had me convince that Duke engineering
students do have to learn touchy-feely holistic things:
http://www.ee.duke.edu/undergrads/

Each program provides a solid foundation in analytical thinking,
problem solving, and technology, and each fosters the
development of ethical leadership, communication, and teamwork
skills.

Next I went to their web page called "Areas of Undergraduate
Concentration". Hmmmmmm. No holistic training to be seen. Listed below are
the areas that undergrads need to concentrate on for electrical
engineering:

http://www.ee.duke.edu/undergrads/concentrations.php
Computer Engineering and Digital Systems
Signal Processing, Communications, and Control Systems
Solid-State Devices and Integrated Circuits
Control Systems and Robotics
Electromagnetic Fields
Photonics

Hmmmmmm. Seems like the same kind of stuff I had to take 25 years ago,
minus the computer courses which weren't part of engineering back in the
old days. Just to make sure I wasn't prematurely judging Johnson as a Dean
who doesn't practice what she preaches, I went to the curriculum page for
EEs. So where is the training to be holistic here? Are engineers being
advised that they better take project management and psychology for their 5
electives?

http://www.ee.duke.edu/undergrads/ee.php
Minimum course requirements for the Electrical Engineering (EE) program
are:

WRITING 20, during the first academic year
5 elective Social Studies or Humanities courses, appropriately distributed
A 6-course mathematics sequence (MATH 31, 32, 103, 107 & 108; and STA 113
or MATH 135 or ECE 255)
4 natural science courses (CHEM 21L, PHYSICS 61L and 62L (see NOTE below),
BIOLOGY 25L)
EGR 53L (see NOTE below)
ECE 61L, 62L, 64, 151L, 163L, and 170L
Two elective EE 2-course sequences
An Engineering Design Elective
One ECE-Course Elective
5 free electives

CONCLUSION:

Some people might think the best route to a high paying job might be to
skip the tough engineering classes and just take liberal arts with a few
computer courses on how use Windoze operating systems and make excel
spreadsheets. That would be a biiiiiiiig mistake! Just to prove my point
there is a recent Dice.com job ad following Ms. Johnson's op-ed. Notice
that in addition to having experience doing project planning and
management, you have to have skills in just about every type of computer
system and software language that has been developed over the last 30
years!

If you want to email Ms. Kristina Johnson a message, her email address is
at the end of the article below. I'm going to make you go through the
trouble of clicking the link to get her email address so that you will
hopefully read this last phrase - DO NOT FORWARD MY NEWSLETTER TO HER! She
needs to hear your thoughts, not mine. She has already had a belly full of
my thoughts.

I don't think it would do any harm to let her know what life is like for
real world engineers. Ask her just how does she expect engineers to be
holistic when her own university doesn't give holistic educations for
engineers.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/13573409.htm

Posted on Sun, Jan. 08, 2006

U.S. engineers hold their own

Kristina M. Johnson

is dean of the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University

Is the technological sky really falling?

Much has been said about the fact that the United States graduates about
70,000 engineers a year, while India and China purportedly graduate five
and nine times that number, respectively. Or do they?

A new study by a class in Duke University's Master of Engineering
Management Program indicates that comparisons of U.S.
engineering-graduation numbers with the 350,000 in India and 644,000 in
China may be like comparing apples and oranges.

It seems to me that we need to stop and ask, is it quantity or quality that
we seek? And what do we need to do to have the best workforce possible? How
do we keep high-quality technological jobs in our country?

The Duke engineering-student study, led by executive-in-residence Vivek
Wadhwa and sociology professor Gary Gereffi, performed a detailed analysis
of the kinds of "engineers" counted in the numbers from India, and they
found that in addition to four-year baccalaureate degrees, these numbers
contain a significant number of three-year, sub-baccalaureate degrees. (For
details, see http://memp.duke.edu/

outsourcing/.)

If you add up all the engineering and technology graduates (computer
science, information technology and engineering) in the United States, we
see that the United States actually is graduating about the same number of
students as India - and India has more than three times the population.

The researchers were not able to verify the same detailed breakdown for
students graduating from Chinese universities. According to the Chinese
Ministry of Education, however, any bachelor's degree or "short-cycle"
degree with "engineering" in its title is counted, regardless of the
degree's field, or academic rigor associated with it.

Why is this important? Because, as Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers has told
me, "Jobs will go to the best-educated workforce." A rigorous technical
education is not enough to compete successfully in a global society.
Concentration solely on the technical aspects ignores the crucial human
skills and talents best imparted by a broader approach to education.

Companies are keen to hire students who have a holistic perspective of
their field, are able to integrate knowledge across the disciplines, work
well in teams, possess persuasive communication skills, and have respect
and an understanding of other cultures. Such "dynamic engineers" also may
possess leadership skills. And you don't outsource leadership.

In the United States, the American Society of Engineering Educators and the
Accreditation Board on Engineering and Technology (ABET) help engineering
educators define what is "best." The 70,000 engineers graduated yearly in
the United States do so from ABET-accredited programs that seek to ensure
their graduates are skilled in the traits described above. ABET-accredited
degrees have a senior-year, capstone design course that focuses on
integrating the knowledge gained from fundamental coursework in the applied
sciences and engineering. To be sure, the degrees also are calculus-based,
and require in-depth knowledge of the natural sciences and mathematics.

My mission as a dean of engineering is to educate the dynamic engineer for
the "Innovation Age." That requires far more than just a solid technical
education. Engineers sustain innovation. They solve problems important to
society, and they generate wealth.

While it appears we are holding our own in graduating well-qualified
engineers, at least compared with India, I am concerned about the pipeline.
Are our entering college students prepared to play in this ever more
globalized, ever more technological society?

We know that our K-12 science and math education is not up to snuff. When
our fourth graders are compared with their international peers, they rank
in the top five. By the time they graduate from high school, however, they
drop to 21st in science and math proficiency. And when you consider that
less than 20 percent of the engineering graduates are women, and less than
10 percent have underrepresented backgrounds, a perfect storm is brewing.

The majority of entering first-year students in 2025 will be from
demographic backgrounds not currently well-represented in the ranks of
engineering, computer and applied scientists. And because math is not
required all four years in our high school curriculums, fewer are qualified
for a dynamic engineering career.

The issue is even more subtle than this. A recent McKinsey study states
that many graduates of Indian and Chinese universities are, for a variety
of reasons, not competitive for employment in the global high-tech
outsourcing environment. This is a worldwide concern because we need as
many qualified engineers as possible to solve the immense problems that
soon will face a global society - whether these engineers are trained in
the United States, India or China. What problems? Developing renewable
energy sources, purifying water, sustaining the environment, providing
low-cost health care and vaccines for infectious diseases. No matter how
our near-future societies address these issues, engineers will be needed.
They also will be called upon to address global climate issues,
transportation needs, and urbanization issues. We are going to need all the
technical horsepower we can educate.

If we don't act now and invest in engineering education, we will certainly
lose the innovation edge we have enjoyed in this country. But I'd go
further. I'd argue that it is our responsibility as good citizens of the
planet to educate more engineers to help shoulder these coming challenges.

Is the sky falling? No, not yet. But if our most talented domestic students
don't go into engineering, the rest of us will have to prop it up somehow.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dice.com ad

Title: Business Analyst
Skills: See Job Description

Date: 1-10-2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Area code: 310

Tax term: FULLTIME
Pay rate: Open
Length: Fulltime

Position ID: wspos194795
Dice ID: RTL97660

Job description:
Oakwood Worldwide is a pioneer in the hospitality industry. We are focused
on continued innovation, commitment to excellence, & attention to every
detail. This is why Oakwood Worldwide has been established in business for
over 40 years, & is a global, industry leader.

Facilitate requirements workshops and/or JAD sessions of information
systems covering all phases of the project life cycle at Program Office
level

Analyze and document:

* Project concept - Business description, problem/opportunity, business
needs, strategic alignment, and project priorities
* Project objectives - Who, what, why, timeframe, success criteria,
completion criteria, major success factors, Divisional milestones, project
milestones, budget projections
* Change control process - Change controller, severity level and approval
procedure
* End system requirements - inclusions and exclusions
* Alternatives - Development choices, technology assessment, and
development approach
* Feasibility and recommendations - Costs versus benefits, risks,
constraints, future opportunities and recommendations
* Project infrastructure
* Project stakeholder role diagram, organization realities, interfaces,
communication plan, plan-to-plan, and PM resource manual
* Project assumptions
* Baseline inputs, component responsibility, methodology and development
and testing environment
* Business requirements - Overview, scope, definitions, use cases,
acronyms, abbreviations and references
* System perspective, architecture, functionality/features, user
characteristics, constraints, and assumptions and dependencies
* Functional requirements, internal and external interface requirements,
internal and external data requirements, and design and implementation
constraints
* Qualification provisions and requirements traceability for each
requirement and desired testing results
* Design and build objectives, constraints and assumptions and dependencies

* Design and build module - overview, program design (site diagrams, data
model, network diagrams, class diagrams, collaboration diagrams, and
sequence diagrams), pseudo code, modification requirements to existing
systems, mapping matrix, environment design and operations design

Qualifications:

To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform
each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are
representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable
accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to
perform the essential functions.

How IT can be used to augment business process

Formal OOD, UML and RUP methodologies and techniques

Project management process, systems requirements gathering and analysis

Facilitation of system design, development and maintenance of information
systems covering all phases of the project life cycle at a Program Office
level

Prioritization of user requirements and specifications for technical design
and development

Database concepts and basic programming in COBOL, FORTRAN, C, C#, HTML,
Visual Basic, VBScript, ASP, Java, JavaScript, and JSP.

Reports specifications, and inter-system interface and design.
Analytical and decision-making skills

Organizational, oral and written communication skills

Microsoft tools including Word, Excel, Project, Visio and PowerPoint

Siebel application, assignment, workflow, call center and remote.

EIM, Workflow processes, EAI and other interface technologies

Web-based systems and Legacy systems (Mainframe, Mid-range and
Client/Server)

Web-based functionality, web services, transformation services, application
integration and orchestration

Any ERP (Financial and HRMS), any reservations and billing systems, Sales
Commission System, Genesys Call Center, Stellent CMS, Corporate Portals,
Bug Tracking, .NET development tools, BizTalk Server, any ETL tools, SQL
Server and Crystal Reporting

Excellent interpersonal skills and has ability to work collaborative with
others and cope with ambiguity

REQUIREMENTS:

Bachelor's degree or equivalent work experience

3+ years experience Software design and development

Requirements and analysis

Project management

Siebel eBusiness Essentials

Siebel 2000 Tools

Siebel eScripting for Applications

Siebel Enterprise Integration Manager

Siebel EAI

.NET Development

Web Services

BizTalk Server

SQL Server

Excellent written & verbal communication skills

Excellent organizational skills

Advanced skills in MS Excel, Word, Powerpoint & Project

Exposure to & familiarity with Project Management Methodology

Ability to communicate w/ individuals at all levels of the organization

Proficiency in Visio a plus

Oakwood Worldwide offers a competitive salary, comprehensive
medical/dental/vision, 401(k) with an employer match, cross departmental
promotions, and career development with an industry leading international
company.

EOE/AA
www.oakwoodcareers.com

Travel required: none
Telecommute: no

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Ms. Johnson

I read with interest your article "U.S. Engineers Hold Their Own".
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/13573409.htm

I am a practicing Electronics Engineer with a BSEE and a Masters degree.

I have worked in the High Tech sector since 1985. My brother is also an

engineer with a BSEE and has worked in this sector since 1979. I know
dozens of Engineers, Scientists and Computer programmers who actually do
real, hands-on work in our industry --- and I dont mean "Sales
Engineers" or Marketing types. I am very familiar with the concerns of
real, hands-on, practicing Tech workers. Our needs, concerns and interests
are definitely not in alignment with those of the academics and corporate
executives who continuously cry "shortage" and push the "we need more
education" button.

What you and other academics scrupulously avoid discussing is the complete
collapse of "High Tech" as a desirable, stable and financially rewarding
career option for our bright young people. Congress creation and
expansion of the H-1B and L-1 Visa programs at the behest of well-heeled
corporate interests has resulted in a GLUT, a SURPLUS, of labor in our
domestic job market. Today there are in excess of 1 MILLION foreigners
here in the U.S. on H-1B and L-1 Visas, taking jobs that otherwise would
have gone to qualified Americans. Numerous studies have shown that
employers can pay 30 - 50% less in wages to these foreign workers, as
compared to a similarly qualified U.S. Citizen. This massive importation
of foreign labor was orchestrated by employers like Cisco Systems (John
Chambers, CEO of Cisco, quoted in your article) to drive down wages, and
employers have been very successful in their effort. The massive glutting
of our domestic labor market has resulted in a huge displacement of U.S.
Citizens and Permanent Legal Residents (Green card holders). Today,
engineers are treated as disposable commodities by industry, and pay for
engineers, in real, inflation-adjusted dollars, has declined steadily since
the 1960s, with this trend now accelerating. While our CEOs rake in
increasingly obscene pay packages, Tech workers doing real technical work
(e.g. not sales, marketing, etc.) - especially those over the age of 35 or
40 - are routinely fired and replaced with younger, cheaper foreign workers
here on H-1B and L-1 Visas from places like India and China. Proponents of
the H-1B visa program claim that there is a "shortage" of qualified
American workers when in fact industry will not even hire the many
well-educated, qualified Americans we already have. Who the hell can say
we arent producing enough engineers, when the engineers we now have
cant get work?? Unemployment and under-employment of Americans with
good educations and experience in the Tech fields is now at all time record
levels. In many cases, before losing his or her job, the older,
higher-paid American Tech worker is forced to train his or her low-cost
foreign replacement before being laid off. (Refuse to train your
replacement, and you wont get a severance package.) What bright, young
American in his or her right mind would spend between $50K and $100K on a
difficult, rigorous education in Engineering, Mathematics or the Sciences,
to be faced with difficulty in initial job placement, a painfully short
"career", declining pay and a high probability of repeated bouts of
unemployment, ending with being forced out of the field at age 35 or 40?
The H-1B and L-1 Visa programs are a big enabler of "offshoring" and the
trend to offshore American tech jobs will only accelerate as time goes on.
The future prospects for jobs for Americans in this area do not look good.

As a parent of two young children, I would definitely not encourage my kids
to pursue a "career in engineering. By the time they are college-age,
it is likely that they would never even be able to recover the cost of
their education before being forced out of work.

Todays bright young kids have seen how their parents, aunts, uncles,
cousins, etc. working in High Tech have been treated, and are voting with
their feet. My own nephew, who is extremely bright, graduated with top
grades from a highly regarded private high school and had near-perfect SAT
scores is now at U.C. Berkeley in his 2nd year. He is avoiding Engineering
/ Computer Science like the plague. He watched his own dad (Electronics
Engineer) get tossed out onto the street and replaced by an Indian on an
H-1B Visa. Both my brother and I have made it our mission to show young
people like him what doing high-tech work involves and after seeing his dad
out of work for 1 = years, my nephew doesnt need much convincing.
Personally, I told him he should become a lawyer, or perhaps a physician.
Even the guards working in the California prison system (union jobs) make
more than engineers these days, with pay well into the six-figure range,
and the prison guards enjoy job security and fantastic health and
retirement benefits. You dont need to spend $100K of the familys
money at a University in order to become a prison guard.

What about more women in engineering? The women I knew at college were too
smart to fall for that: they saw the poor career prospects in engineering
and instead went into Business, Law or Medicine.

You in academia have a big problem: your empires, your budgets and your
status depend upon having an expanding department with growing numbers of
students. Since American kids are smarter than you realize, since they
can see through the horse-shit spouted off by arrogant self-serving CEOs
like Ciscos John Chambers, and they can see for themselves the dim,
unstable and financially decaying prospects for U.S. Citizens in the Tech
fields, they are avoiding enrolling in dead-end programs in engineering and
other Tech-related areas. I dont expect that you or 95% of the other
academics will ever honestly address the real issues surrounding this
debate, as people like you have consistently sided with industry - and a
large supply of low-wage foreign labor is also advantageous to you in terms
of filling up and running your graduate programs, building up university
department empires, etc.

Since the American middle class form the tax base to provide much of the
funding for the University system, you face another problem: as the
American middle class, including many former tech workers, see their jobs
taken by foreigners here or have their jobs shipped offshore entirely, the
taxes taken in by federal, state and local authorities shrink. Academics
such as yourself are therefore faced with very painful job cuts in the
future, due to both the lack of new students entering your system, as well
as a decline in tax revenues forcing budget cuts for higher education.
Looks like "what goes around, comes around".

As for the alleged "shortage" of engineers with advanced degrees: the
return-on-investment for U.S. Citizens earning Masters and Doctorate
degrees in Engineering is a negative number, in terms of securing a job,
additional pay, career advancement, and job security. Furthermore, even in
the 1980s when an undergrad, I was constantly faced with the dilemma of
having foreign Teaching Assistants and lecturers who could not speak
English, people that I, as an English-speaking U.S. Citizen simply could
not understand. There was a disproportionate number of foreign students
in the grad programs at that time, and I personally saw several U.S.
Citizen undergrads with grades in the 3.3 - 3.7 / 4.0 GPA range rejected
from the University of California, Davis graduate engineering programs as
the college preferred awarding graduate seats to foreign students.
(Interestingly, per state laws, foreign students are required to pay far
more in fees than did the U.S. Citizens who were California residents,
personally I suspect that there was a financial incentive for the U.C.
system to show preference to foreign students.) Professors seldom teach,
and the T.As they used often had no proficiency in English. What a bad
situation. I thought all of this was bad 20 years ago; now I hear from
people like my nephew at U.C. Berkeley that this problem is even worse
today. So, with regard to advanced engineering degrees, you have 1) no
return on investment for the American engineering grad student and 2)
rejection of qualified U.S. Citizen applicants who apply, while non-English
speaking foreigners who buy their way in are granted seats in grad programs
and wind up as Teaching Assistants or Lecturers. Now, given this
situation, who is to blame here for the alleged "shortage" of American-born
engineers with advanced degrees? Look in the mirror, Kristina. People
like YOU are to blame.

I earned my MSEE a full 7 years after my BSEE, going to school on a
part-time basis at a private school while working in industry full-time,
and were it not for the fact that my then-employers paid for the tuition
cost, I never would have worked on a Masters degree as I could not have
paid for it out of my own pocket, on a young engineers salary. These
days, employers have cut back on their tuition assistance programs, and
today, the highest paid, most financially successful people in my industry
work in Sales, Marketing and Management, not in engineering or development;
and of those successful people who have advanced degrees, most of them have
a Masters in Business Administration (M.B.A.) or Accounting, not
Engineering. Couple this hard, financial reality with the near-total
collapse of the high tech job sector, and you people in academia and
industry crying about a "shortage" of engineers with advanced degrees look
like a pack of liars with narrow, self-serving interests. What crap. Do
you honestly believe running one op-ed like the one you wrote will correct
decades of deeply rooted, fundamental problems?

You folks made your bed, you in academia have, for the most part,
consistently sided with Big Business in terms of promoting the myth of a
"shortage" of American talent, while failing to honestly address the issues
of pay, advancement, job security and respect for our own Citizens. You
folks screw the American families who pay the taxes that fund your academic
empires. You push bright young American kids aside while handing out seats
in undergraduate and graduate programs to foreigners. Why dont you go
ask the lobbying groups that represent India and Chinas economic
interests for more money for your programs, and leave us American taxpayers
alone? Time for you to sleep in the bed you made. Im watching as your
enrollment numbers plummet and your budgets get squeezed, and I laugh about
it. Maybe you should vacate your ivory-tower and try getting a private
sector job and rub elbows with the unwashed masses.

I believe the word that best sums up my feelings toward those of you in
academia comes from the German language - the word here is "Schadenfreude".

Sincerely,

GW

NOTE FROM ROB: Ms. Johnson did reply to GWs email, and it was as vacuous as
the one she sent to me.

www.ZaZona.com
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Subscribe, Unsubscribe or to view the Archive go to:
http://www.zazona.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Back to archives