Techies Migrate in Search of Work

prostoalex writes "Tracing the story of one family where the father is employed in the IT field, the Washington Post discusses the current unemployment in the information technology field. For a good reason - for the first time in 30 years the IT unemployment rate exceeded the national average unemployment rate, implying that you have a better chance of getting a job if your field is something other than IT. The journalist does offer a disclaimer, saying that the term 'IT worker' is applied equally to a top-notch scientist in a research lab, to a dot-com startup billionaire, and to a local HTML guru. Relevant employment statistics also shows that layoffs in the IT field were up 60% in the third quarter of 2004."

Comments

Come to DC!

[TheSync]

There are TONS of IT jobs in Washington, DC. If you are willing and capable of getting a security clearance, you can get a job. Getting your first clearance job will be a bit of a challenge, but once you get it, you are set.

Re:Come to DC!

[StalinsNotDead]

In order to get a security clearance, you must have a job that requires a security clearance. In order to get a job that requires a security clearance, you must have a security clearance.

From my experience, security clearance requires a sponsor. If the company is hiring and needs somebody with clearance, they're not about to sponsor you (it's expensive and they have no experience with you and you might not qualify), so you'll need clearance to get the job.

But if you work for a company that has both secure and insecure contracts, when they need another employee with clearance they'll try to hire one or they'll sponsor a current employee.

Re:Come to DC!

[pragma_x]

I've been off the market in DC for 2 years now.
Not to cry foul with your comment, but last I checked, employers wanted you to already have said clearance. Is this still the case?

That's why I hate "IT"

[ivan256]

I hate the Information Technology label. If anybody asks me if I'm an IT worker I say "no". Even data entry jobs are IT. I wouldn't even call myself a programmer, though I write code. People who do hiring know the difference between the types of people that get lumped into the IT category, so why can't the trade rags, marketing departments, and mainstream media figure it out?

And for the record, even though IT jobs are down, software engineering jobs are up. Especially in the Operating systems and Device Driver areas. If they didn't lump unskilled workers and skilled workers together in the same category they'd be able to tell the difference.

I own a small it company

[prisoner]

and while I don't know much about the economy overall I can say this much: it seems like the older It guys who survived the .com implosion are kinda burning out and looking towards different types of IT employment. Many are willing to give up high-paying (and/or high-pressure) jobs miles away in the city in order to be near home and, in many cases, a new child or wife. I know it's not unique to our field but I do believe that most IT people tend to think a bit differently about this and come to the decision that money isn't the be-all. I recently put a listing in the local paper for a desktop support guy, $10-$20/hour. I got an amazing number of responses from people who were *already employed* making way more money than I was offering and were clearly over qualified. Number one reason was to be closer to home. Number two was traffic.

At first I chalked it up to people who were lying about already being employed but after talking to them on the phone I'm not so sure. I'm near Washington and our IT scene isn't as bleak as other places so this may be a local trend.

Re:Nation Wide Problem

[cloveygrl]

It's not nationwide. There are definitely areas where the job market is considerably better and there seems to be pockets where certain types of jobs are more plentiful. I recently moved from the PNW to Chicago for this very reason.

Re:Bush

[Marxist Hacker 42]

The kind of person who recognizes that when there is a government budget surplus, there is more money available for investment in private industry, just as when the government runs huge multi-trillion deficits between trade and government spending, there is less money for investment in private industry. The first scenario leads to companies making the decision to hire more people, the second leads to companies making the decision to lay off as many people as possible.

Understand now why tax cuts done irresponsibily lose jobs?

hah! insecurity clearance!

[Tangurena]

Having spent some time in Colorado Springs last year, I learned that the biggest killer for a security clearance is your credit. Having been out of work in 2001 and 2003/4, my credit score was way down there in the 400s. It is sad that too many employers make a decision as to whether you are a "worthy" hire or not based upon credit.

All too often, the complaints about "we can't find workers" really translates into "we can't find workers willing to work at those wages" or "we can't find workers with good credit."

It takes 18-36 months for a clearance. If you have great credit, you can get an "interim clearance" which is a temporary one until the real clearance is done. If you have spotty to rotten credit, you can expect to get turned down. Security officers know that, so your credit score is more important in an interview than whether you have a brain.

Re:ALL DEMURRALS ASIDE

[citadelgrad]

Just remember that George W. Bush reduced the outsourcing tax from 25% to 5%...
Not True. The problem has existed for sometime. http://www.factcheck.org/article225.html

Article Quoted:
In fact, tax experts say the incentive has been there for decades - since there has been a corporate income tax. It's not Bush's doing.

The incentive exists because the US taxes corporations at rates higher than most other countries. According to the Institute for International Economics, the effective rate for US corporations was just over 30% in 2002, while mainland China's effective corporate rate was only 11.3%, Britain's 18.2%, Mexico's 15.1% and Indonesia's a miniscule 0.2%.

Re:$30 an hour? Whaaaaaaa

[EvilStein]

c) Why the hell is he making payments on a 2002 car if he is in such bad shape? Sell/trade the damn thing in on a late 90s used car, expenses go down.

Probably because he cannot sell it for what it's worth and trading it in would only drive him deeper into the hole?
I've been right where this guy is. I could *not sell* a car that I couldn't afford anymore. The finance company rejected several very qualified people. Why? They make more reposessing the vehicle and selling it at auction.

d) Renting a Motel room is stupid, but I will say the article attempted to explain it as his bad credit keeps him from renting/homeowning, and that is understandable to an extent, but I'd wager that statement was only relevant with respect to the types of homes they would deem acceptable, they probably could suck it up and live in a lease below their prior standards until back on their feet.

Hah. I've been here, and it *sucks* especially when you get hit with $50 "application fees" (per person) only to be told "No, sorry, your PERFECT rental history and good job don't matter.. you have unpaid utility bills.."
Bad credit isn't always caused by people getting into credit cards. I got slapped with thousands in medical bills after being hit by a car (hit & run) without insurance. I couldn' afford to pay, so guess who has a bunch of collections on his credit report? Yup, me.

Just because someone has bad credit doesn't mean that they were trying to live outside their means.

Let them Eat Cake!!

[catherder_finleyd]

You win the Marie Antoinette award for the week! If you have to live in a hotel, you don't have an oven to "bake your own bread" or "cook a roast". You don't have space to grow your own tomatoes either. You might not even have access to a range top or microwave. It's even worse if you have to live in your car!