Communications Workers of America

October 2012

OFFSHORING AMERICAN
CALL CENTERS:
The Threat to Consumers,
Communities, and
National Security

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
When companies send call center jobs overseas, they
don’t just frustrate consumers—they hurt our
economy as well.
—Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown
I
n recent years, U.S. companies exported more than
500,000 call center jobs to India, the Philippines,
Egypt, Mexico, Honduras, and other developing na-
tions.1 Call centers are a valuable source of jobs in the
United States, employing as many as five million Amer-
icans—nearly four percent of the U.S. workforce.2 Re-
cent technological advances have made it easier to
transfer these jobs overseas to lower-paid, less regulated
workers, a trend that increases risks for consumers and
devastates communities nationwide.
The offshoring trend has evolved into a crisis for con-
sumers, with fraud and identity theft becoming a multi-
million-dollar business. For example, in one widely
reported scam, criminals used foreign call center workers
to make 2.7 million calls and collect some $5.2 million
through threats and intimidation, alleging that innocent
consumers owed money for past loans.3
In the current economic landscape, with millions un-
employed and the recovery shaky, U.S. workers and the
communities in which they live need these call center
jobs. In response, the U.S. Congress is taking action.
Both the House of Representatives and the Senate are
reviewing bills to keep call centers in the United States
and to end federal rewards and incentives for offshoring.
At least seven state legislatures are moving forward on
similar legislation.4
The Consequences of Offshoring
Federal action is essential because the consequences of
offshoring are destructive on many levels, devastating
individuals, communities and the nation.
1
• Consumers’ financial and medical data become vul-
nerable to theft and misuse by poorly regulated con-
tractors overseas.
• Communities that subsidized call center expansion
a few years ago are devastated by the sudden loss of
jobs and revenue.
• Laid-off workers and their families join the rolls of
the unemployed and often lose their sense of inde-
pendence along with their paychecks.
• National security may be threatened as more finan-
cial, medical, and personal data about American cor-
porations and citizens falls into the hands of
contractors in less stable nations.
Despite such clear vulnerability to fraud, four large
banks — Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, Wells
Fargo, and Citigroup — have recently moved call center
operations to the Philippines, a country that lacks even
the most basic safeguards for security, privacy, and legal
accountability.5
In addition to the threat to consumers’ wallets, off-
shoring presents a threat to civil liberties. Once data is
moved overseas, Fourth Amendment protections from
warrantless searches disappear.
Finally, given the instability of some new offshoring sites,
data security must be given even more serious scrutiny.
Egypt, which recently experienced an unexpected polit-
ical upheaval during the “Arab Spring,” is rapidly be-
coming one of the most popular locations for new call
centers.
Bi-partisan Support from Congress and
the Public
Legislation now pending in both the House and Senate
addresses the multiple threats posed by increased off-
shoring of call centers. Both the House bill (H.R. 3596)
and the Senate bill (S.3402) are designed to keep jobs
in the United States and improve protections and service
for consumers.

U.S. CALL CENTER WORKER AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT — H.R. 3596 AND S. 3402
This bi-partisan legislation would:
• Require call center agents to reveal their locations
to U.S. consumers and transfer customers to U.S. call
centers upon request.
• Prohibit companies that move call center jobs
overseas from receiving federal grants and loans.
• Give preference on government contracts to
companies that keep call center jobs at home.
Voters across the political spectrum support legislation
to keep call centers at home. An August 2012 survey of
likely voters nationwide found that the vast majority
strongly support proposals to limit the offshoring of call
center jobs. According to the survey, 90 percent support
proposals that would give customers’ the right to request
transfer to a U.S.-based customer service agent. An over-
whelming number of respondents support prohibitions
against giving federal loans (81 percent) and grants (75
percent) to companies that send call center jobs overseas.
Three-quarters (78 percent) rated overseas call centers
negatively, including 79 percent of Democrats, 75 per-
cent of Republicans, and 78 percent of Independents.6
BREAKING DOWN THE
CALL CENTER THREAT
If you think about the scenario, you have the lowest-
paid contractors furthest away from the main office,
all with access to sensitive data. It’s an incredibly
risky proposition.
—Paul Bilden, Covelight Internet security company
2
M
any U.S. companies are taking advantage of
cheaper labor costs by relocating facilities to
the developing world. India is the most well-
known magnet for call centers, but last year the Philip-
pines surpassed India with some 400,000 workers
devoted to answering Americans’ calls.7 Companies also
are moving quickly into China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,
Mexico, and the Czech Republic, among other sites. The
result for consumers:
• Lack of security for private records—including fi-
nancial and medical records.
• Loss of millions of dollars to fraud.
• Violation of Fourth Amendment protections against
warrantless search and seizure.
Hundreds of Thousands of Security
Breaches
Threats to consumers’ private data are not new. For at
least a decade, security breaches in overseas call centers
have been reported in the U.S. and European press. For-
eign call center workers have peddled customers’ finan-
cial and health information to criminals, defrauded
consumers of millions of dollars by posing as debt col-
lectors, and stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars from
bank customers.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has been investi-
gating scams defrauding Americans. For example,
Citibank customers in the United States lost more than
$400,000 to Indian call center scams.8 British bank cus-
tomers have also lost hundreds of thousands of pounds,
and journalists have gained access to private bank ac-
count records.9
In 2012 a call center ring based in India scammed con-
sumers by impersonating workers from Microsoft and
Apple, gaining access to personal information by offer-
ing to do security checks.10 In the Philippines and India,
call center employees have been arrested for a variety of
schemes to steal consumer financial data and make off
with thousands of dollars from American Citibank and
HSBC.11

INDIA IS NOT YET A “DATA SAFE” NATION
Although India is more advanced than most other
developing nations in terms of technology and
security, it has yet to be approved by the EU as a
“data safe” nation. European companies are
increasingly wary of transferring critical business
information to Indian contractors, with good reason.
The New York State Department of Labor has
expressed similar concerns about data security
abroad, particularly for the medical and financial
industries.
Although private companies and the Indian
government downplay security risks for obvious
reasons, independent security analysts find that
“costs are being cut somewhere and many a time it is
security.”
"We know this business is out of control," police
sources told UK journalists earlier this year. "The
simple fact is the banks are worried that their
customers will get scared and swap banks if they
learn how easily and cheaply their confidential
details are sold.”
Although India has taken steps to improve its data
privacy laws, the government specifically omitted
outsourcing companies from such regulations in
2011. The Times of India reported that the
government caved in to pressure from the multi-
billion-dollar outsourcing industry.
Mazher Mahmood and Jon Ungoed-Thomas, “Tuppence a fact:
the starting price for your stolen life,” The Sunday Times, March 18,
2012 (http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Mazher/
article996481.ece)
Soutik Biswas, “How Secure Are India’s Call Centres” BBC News
June 24, 2005
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4619859.stm)
“Government Relents, New IT Security Rules Exempt BPOs,”
The Times of India August 26, 2011
(http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-26/
outsourcing/29931326_1_bpos-security-rules-security-practices )
3
Companies are understandably reluctant to report secu-
rity breaches, fearing negative publicity. But one study
of the problem completed in 2005 found that 83 per-
cent of Indian outsourcing companies had experienced
information security breaches.12
Overseas call centers have not only defrauded companies
and stolen from consumers, they’ve also used health
records as blackmail tools against management, stolen
valuable data from tech company databases, and at-
tempted to sell trade secrets from American software
companies to Indian competitors.13
The Indian government is not taking measures to ad-
dress the problem. The Indian parliament passed a new
data privacy law in 2011, but outsourcing companies
were specifically exempted from the regulations.14
Lax Laws and Even More Lax Security
In foreign countries, background checks of employees
that measure up to U.S. standards are difficult and ex-
pensive, but they are clearly necessary. Up to one-fourth
of all call center applicants outside the United States pro-
vide false information on applications.15
For the most part, there are no central criminal databases
in developing countries, and credit rating agencies are
relatively new. Therefore, background checks are most
often done in person, a time-consuming and invasive
process, costing $30 to $1,000 per employee. In the
United States, a more thorough vetting usually costs less
than $100 per employee.16
Investigators face several obstacles when seeking informa-
tion about potential employees, including the lack of per-
manent ID numbers, such as social security cards, to help
track workers. Many police departments in developing
nations do not store or organize criminal records carefully.
More Call Centers,
Less Security in the Philippines
In 2011, the Philippines surpassed India as the main
destination for offshore call centers. But the Philippines
has even fewer legal protections to stop data breaches
than does India.
More than 400,000 Filipinos work in call centers for
companies as diverse as T-Mobile, JP Morgan Chase, and
Expedia. There are
currently no regu-
THE PHILIPPINES lations in the
• 400,000 call center workers Philippines gov-
erning data pro-
• No regulations governing tection, although a
data protection law is under con-
sideration to make
the country com-
pliant with Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) standards.17
Clearly, the strict security measures followed by U.S. com-
panies are simply absent in many other countries. And
once a crime has been committed at an offshore call cen-
ter, a complex variety of laws and legal systems frequently
thwart attempts to identify and prosecute the culprits.
Warrantless Surveillance:
Bypassing the Fourth Amendment
Threats to data security in foreign call centers can come
from another—perhaps unexpected—source. As a result
of offshoring, U.S. consumers’ personal and financial
data is subject to warrantless federal surveillance.
In June 2011, consumers brought a class-action lawsuit
against American Express, charging that the company’s
customer calls are routed to foreign call centers without
the callers’ permission or knowledge. This subjects con-
sumers to intrusive and warrantless investigations by the
federal government. A similar lawsuit was brought
against Bank of America two months later.18
The root of these breaches of citizens’ fourth Amend-
ment protections is the transfer of financial and other
data overseas. Once information is at a foreign call cen-
ter, and as long as one individual’s data is not specifically
targeted, that data legally can be collected and analyzed
by U.S. federal agencies without a warrant.
4
Offshoring Harms
American Communities
Call centers have become economic lifelines in many
American communities over the past 20 years, as U.S.-
based manufacturing jobs have disappeared. Local gov-
ernments have committed millions in tax dollars to fund
incentives to lure companies, only to watch those com-
panies offshore call center jobs a few years later, leaving
their citizens unemployed and disillusioned.
This year, T-Mobile closed seven U.S. call centers, put-
ting 3,300 employees out of work—after accepting $61
million in state and local subsidies.19 Instead of closing
some of its call centers in Honduras or the Philippines,
T-Mobile prefers to shutter U.S. workplaces.
Wells Fargo followed a similar route—laying off hun-
dreds and moving operations to the Philippines, while
workers in Florida, California, and Pennsylvania were
left jobless. The banking giant, which received more
than $25 billion in federal TARP money during the
darkest days of the recession, is tripling the number of
its Filipino employees and has asked some U.S. employ-
ees to train their own replacements.20
Sykes, a company that handles support and technical
calls, took millions of dollars in loans and tax breaks
from small towns in Oregon and Florida, where it lo-
cated new call centers. Just a few years later it relocated
operations to Asia. Town leaders pleaded with the com-
pany, citing enormous investments of taxpayer money—
but Sykes left anyway, and hundreds of workers lost their
jobs.21
A depressed town in a small southwest Virginia county
lost 250 desperately-needed jobs when Travelocity shut
down a call center and moved to India.22
When a call center closes in a small or medium-size
community, the result is a major blow to the economy.
Retail businesses are shuttered when paychecks disap-
pear. The devastation of so many communities during
the continuing recession is indefensible.
Consumers and National Security
A new trend in offshoring may mean even greater risk
for American consumers’ money and sensitive informa-
tion. Call centers are now locating in a broader variety
of developing nations with lower wages—and less stable
political regimes.
In the final years of the Mubarak regime, Egypt became
a major site for new call centers. Egypt actively sought
subcontracting from India, hoping to gain a foothold in
the industry with its multilingual workforce.
Today Microsoft, Ericsson, Vodaphone, and Alcatel all
have call centers in a “smart village” in Egypt. Yet the
new regime is still a major unknown and lacks the sta-
bility that can ensure the safety and security of sensitive
financial and personal data.23
Quality Customer Service
Derrick, a CWA-represented call center employee in
Jacksonville, Florida, summed up the pride he takes
in a job well done. “What more can you say about a
job where you get to hear ‘thank you’ everyday—
especially ‘thank you for being an American.’”
As overseas call centers take over customer service func-
tions, U.S. consumers often meet frustration, delays, and
roadblocks as they seek information. U.S. call center em-
ployees have a better understanding of an American caller’s
language and cultural context, and typically are more
highly-trained and experienced in answering questions.
U.S. call center employees receive more training and have
more experience on the job than overseas call center work-
ers. Two-thirds (62 percent) of Indian call center employ-
ees have less than one year job tenure, compared to nine
percent at U.S. based union-represented call centers.24
Some employers, recognizing that high quality service
improves their bottom line—are bringing offshored
work back to the United States. AT&T, for example,
transferred 5,000 DSL tech support jobs to American
workers, and U.S. Airways returned reservation agents
to three U.S. call centers in 2011.25
5
HOW H.R. 3596 and
S. 3402 WILL HELP
L
egislation now before both Houses of Congress
(S. 3402 and H.R. 3596) takes aim at the prob-
lem of offshore call centers—sometimes referred
to as modern-day sweatshops—that exploit foreign
workers, traffic in identity theft and fraud, and regularly
mishandle sensitive personal data.
THE U.S. CALL CENTER WORKER AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT — H.R. 3596 AND S.3402
Bi-partisan legislation, sponsored by Representatives
Tim Bishop (D-NY) and David McKinley (R-WV) in the
House and Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Bob
Casey (D-PA) in the Senate, would offer the following
protections:
• U.S. consumers would have the right to request a
transfer to a U.S.-based service agent.
• Overseas call center employees would be required
to disclose their names and precise locations to
consumers on the phone.
• Create a publicly available “bad actor” list of U.S.
companies that offshore U.S. call center jobs. These
companies would not be eligible for federal loans or
grants, and the federal government would offer
preference in civilian and defense contracts to
companies not on the list.
The Bottom Line: U.S. Taxpayer Money
Should Not Support Offshoring Jobs
In recent years, more than a half million call center jobs
have been offshored. In these difficult economic times,
the notion that the federal government is supporting
companies that move jobs overseas makes no sense, par-
ticularly when consumers, communities, and national
security all suffer as a result of offshoring.
The bills before the U.S. House and Senate now will go
a long way toward stopping the flow of jobs overseas and
bringing them back to American cities and towns to
support middle-class families. ■
Endnotes
1
Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and American Teleservices Association, as cited by Congressman Tim Bishop (D-NY), “Bishop Urges White House
Action on Call Center Insourcing,” Jan. 11, 2012 ( http://timbishop.house.gov/latest-news/bishop-urges-white-house-action-on-call-center-insourcing/ )

2
American Teleservices Association, (http://www.ataconnect.org/pdfs/usmap.pdf). According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 2.5 million em-
ployees in various customer service occupations in the U.S., including customer service reps, account clerks, collections reps, reservation agents, telemar-
keters, order clerks, credit authorizers telephone operators, and switchboard clerks. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, May
2011. (www.bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm)

3
Federal Trade Commission News, “Court Halts Alleged Fake Debt Collector Calls from India, Grants FTC Request to Stop Defendants Who Posed as Law En-
forcers,” April 11, 2012 (http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/04/broadway.shtm)

4
Legislation has been introduced in California, New York, Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, West Virginia, and Arizona. See, for example: The New York State As-
sembly text of the Save New York Call Center Jobs Act of 2012, http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?sh=printbill&bn=A09809&term= Metro News, “Another Try
for Call Center Bill,” (http://www.wvmetronews.com/index.cfm?func=displayfullstory&storyid=53484&type); Text of California Bill
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml; CWA, “D2-13 Legislative Team Helps Win Protections Against Offshoring,” http://www.cwa-
union.org/news/entry/d2-13_legislative_team_helps_win_protections_against_offshoring_in_maryland#.UHMOaDnrBlI ; Loeb & Loeb, LLP, “States Intro-
duce Bills Penalizing Overseas Call Centers,” http://www.loeb.com/statebillspenalizingoverseascallcenters/

5
U.S. Banks that operate call centers in the Philippines include Bank of America, (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/05/bank-of-america-outsourc-
ing-call-center-philippines); J.P. Morgan Chase (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/business/philippines-overtakes-india-as-hub-of-call-
centers.html?_r=0 ); Wells Fargo
(http://technews.tmcnet.com/call-center-outsourcing/topics/call-center-outsourcing/articles/275750-wells-fargo-expand-call-center-outsourcing-facility-
the.htm ); and Citigroup (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/world/2011-01-10-callcenters10_CV_N.htm )

6
Lake Research Partners, “Voters give near universal support for anti-offshoring proposals,” Survey of 805 likely voters, July 26-31, 2012
(http://cwafiles.org/national/News/Misc/PollingResultsMemo81412.pdf ); “Americans Support Legislation to Limit Call Center Offshoring, Contact Center So-
lutions, Aug. 16, 2012 (http://callcenterinfo.tmcnet.com/Analysis/articles/303623-cwa-says-americans-support-legislation-limit-call-center.htm)

7
Vikas Bajaj, “A New Capital of Call Centers,” New York Times, November 26, 2011 (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/business/philippines-overtakes-
india-as-hub-of-call-centers.html?pagewanted=all )

8
“2 Indian Americans held in U.S. for defrauding hundreds of $400,000,” The Indian Express, June 9, 2012, ( http://www.indianexpress.com/news/2-indian-
americans-held-in-us-for--defrauding--hundreds-of--400000/959783/ )

9
Chirtra Somayaji, “HSBC Worker in India Charged for Assisting Fraud,” Bloomberg News, June 28, 2006
(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=anmGQS5neXDk&refer=uk ); Soutik Biswas, “How Secure Are India’s Call Centres” BBC
News June 24, 2005 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4619859.stm)

10
Tom Bristow, “Trading Standards warning over Asian call centres targeting Norfolk homes every day with computer ‘fault’ scam,” EDP 24, February 7, 2012
(http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/trading_standards_warning_over_asian_call_centres_targeting_norfolk_homes_every_day_with_computer_fault_sca
m_1_1201408)

11
Sarith Rai, “Fraud Reports Worry India Outsourcing Firms,” October 4, 2006 (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/04/business/worldbusiness/04iht-
expose.3031987.html?_r=0 ); Sufia Tippu, “Employee Fraud at HSCB BP in Bangalore, IT Wire, June 28, 2006 (http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/mar-
ket/4781-employee-fraud-at-hsbc-bpo-in-bangalore)

12
Pricewaterhousecoopers study referenced in “India Fortifies Its Data Security,” Washington Times , May 27, 2005
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/may/27/20050527-103942-3132r/?page=all)

13
David Lazarus, “Extortion Threat to Patients’ Records,” San Francisco Chronicle April 2, 2004 (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Extortion-threat-to-pa-
tients-records-Clients-2771918.php ); K. V. Subramanya, “HSBC Scam,” The Hindu June 30, 2006
(http://www.hindu.com/2006/06/30/stories/2006063002920700.htm); Sonia Baldia, “Offshoring to India: Are Your Trade Secrets and Confidential Infor-
mation Adequately Protected?” Mondaq.com March 26, 2010 (http://www.mayerbrown.com/files/Publication/c4321838-f2ec-4fe5-990d-
1ea497a7398b/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/5a87579c-8d2b-469d-ad3d-bb95435fe6ff/ART_OFFSHORINGTOINDIA_0308.PDF )

14
“Government Relents, New IT Security Rules Exempt BPOs,” The Times of India August 26, 2011 (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-
26/outsourcing/29931326_1_bpos-security-rules-security-practices )

15
Zubair Ahmed, “Outsourcing exposes firms to fraud,” BBC News, June 16, 2005 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4094894.stm)

6
16
Karen Schwartz, “The Background-Check Challenge,” Information Week, July 18, 2005 (http://www.informationweek.com/the-background-check-
challenge/165702657?pgno=1 )

17
Vikas Bajaj, “A New Capital of Call Centers,” New York Times, November 26, 2011 ( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/business/philippines-overtakes-
india-as-hub-of-call-centers.html?_r=1 )

18
Zoe Tillman, “Bank of America sued for outsourcing customer calls overseas,” National Law Journal, August 4, 2011
(http://bghllp.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/2011BoASuitPrint1PagebyPage.263175511.pdf)

19
Nat Levy, “Protesters decry T-Mobile’s decision to close call centers,” Bellevue Reporter, April 6, 2012
(http://www.bellevuereporter.com/news/147682735.html?mobile=true ) ; Good Jobs First, Money on the Line report September 2011, (http://www.goodjob-
sfirst.org/sites/default/files/docs/pdf/tmobile_sep2011.pdf )

20
“Wells Fargo sets up BPO in PH,” Asian Journal, March 14, 2012 (http://www.asianjournal.com/dateline-philippines/headlines/15162-wells-fargo-sets-up-
bpo-in-ph.html); Mary Ann Milbourn, “Wells Fargo Bank laying off 315 in O.C.,” Orange County Register March 20, 2012
(http://economy.blog.ocregister.com/2012/03/20/wells-fargo-bank-laying-off-315-in-o-c/106102/ ); Alex Ferreras, “Wells Fargo to Shed 300 Jobs, Close
Lake Mary Call Center, as it Trims 4% of its Florida Work force,” Loansafe.org, September 22, 2011 (http://www.loansafe.org/wells-fargo-to-shed-300-jobs-
close-lake-mary-call-center-as-it-trims-4-of-its-florida-work-force ); Lynn Olanoff, “Wells Fargo Cutting Jobs in Bethlehem, Moving Jobs from Allentown,” Lehigh
Valley Live, March 4, 2011 (http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/bethlehem/index.ssf/2011/03/wells_fargo_cutting_jobs_in_be.html )Karl Rusnak, “Taxpayer
Dollars Funding Foreign Worker Training, Economy in Crisis, April 20, 2012 ( http://economyincrisis.org/content/american-taxpayer-dollars-are-funding-for-
eign-worker-training )

Scott Barancik, “Small Towns Lose After Gambling on Sykes Jobs,” St. Petersburg Times, March 27, 2004, ( http://www.sptimes.com/2004/03/27/Busi-
21

ness/Small_towns_lose_afte.shtml); Scott Barancik, “Call Center to Close Soon,” St. Petersburg Times July 10, 2004
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/07/10/news_pf/Business/Call_center_to_close_.shtml

22
David Streitfeld, “A Town’s Future is Leaving the Country,” Los Angeles Times, March 28, 2004 (http://articles.latimes.com/2004/mar/28/business/fi-out-
source28)

23
“The Next Outsourcing Hot-Spot,” Oxford Business Group, August 8, 2007 http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/economic_updates/next-outsourcing-hot-spot

24
Rosemary Batt, Virginia Doellgast, and Hyunji Kwon, The U.S. Call Center Report 2004 National Benchmarking Report Strategy, HR Practices & Performance"
2005 (http://works.bepress.com/rosemary_batt/3); David Holman, Rosemary Batt, and Ursula Holtgrewe. "The Global Call Center Report: International Per-
spectives on Management and Employment" 2007 (http://works.bepress.com/rosemary_batt/18).

25
“CWA Contract Returns 400 Outsourced U.S. Airways Call Center Jobs,” (http://www.cwa-
union.org/news/entry/cwa_contract_returns_400_outsourced_us_airways_call_center_jobs#.UHQlMznrBlI ); “Groundbreaking Pact Brings Back AT&T Jobs,”
(http://www.cwa-union.org/news/entry/groundbreaking_pact_brings_back_att_jobs)

Communications Workers of America

October 2012

The Communications Workers of America (CWA) is the union for the Information Age, representing 700,000 workers in
communications, media, airlines, manufacturing and public service.
CWA is the Customer Service Union, representing 150,000 customer service workers employed at call centers in
telecommunications, airline passenger services, the public sector, and the news media. CWA customer service members
help customers with technology support, information requests, billing and service inquiries, and sales assistance.