Slashdot Mirror
Student Sues University Because She's Unemployable
digitalhermit writes "A C student (not the programming language) has sued her former school because she has been unable to find a job in the three months since her graduation. Yup, some schools are degree mills, but this just seems... bizarre."
As Thompson sees it, any reasonable employer would pounce on an applicant with her academic credentials, which include a 2.7 grade-point average and a solid attendance record. But Monroe's career-services department has put forth insufficient effort to help her secure employment, she claims.
"They're supposed to say, 'I got this student, her attendance is good, her GPA is all right -- can you interview this person?' They're not doing that," she said.
Words fail me (briefly).
The best thing to come out of this story is that Ms. Thompson has sent out a nice big red-flag warning to any potential employers not to touch her with a barge pole. After all, if she does this, you can pretty much guarantee she'll sue her employer the moment she gets passed over for a promotion (after all, she shows up for work most days and her last project wasn't a total disaster).
"It doesn't make any sense: They went to school for four years, and then they come out working at McDonald's and Payless. That's not what they planned."
It might not be what they planned, but it is the reality of the job market. The huge expansion in higher education, along with widespread dumbing down of course material and grade inflation, has created a market where many apparently middling graduates just aren't going to have a chance at getting a job that genuinely requires graduate skills. A lot of students who 20 years ago would have been considered middling (but would have gone on to get graduate-level jobs) are now clustered around the top of the class.
At the same time, the self-esteem and all-must-have-prizes philosophies that now pervade much of education have convinced everybody that they deserve to walk right into their dream job, just because they've done nothing more than show up for class and turn in assignments most of the time. The entitlement mentality is right out on show in this story. I do a fair bit of recruitment for my employer and I see plenty more applicants who seem to feel the same way. They don't get very far.
There is an unfortunate side to this. A lot of teens and their parents are still duped into believing that a degree will still lead to a guaranteed "good" job. There's plenty of material out there to counter-act this view and show that in many (possibly even now a majority) of cases, it's a waste of time and money. Unfortunately, this usually gets dismissed as right wing ranting (which I will no doubt get accused of in the replies to this post). The other unfortunate side is that some employers with vacancies that could be filled by a bright high-school graduate seem to feel the need to advertise for a graduate just to "keep up with the Jonses", though I've noticed a slight reversal of this trend recently.
I'd advise Ms. Thompson that with her achievements and attitude, she needs to lower her expectations. She mentions McDonalds sneeringly, but the fact is that they have a general corporate policy of promoting most of their talent internally. If she is as capable as she thinks she is and went to work there with the intention of proving herself (and the attitude to match), she could have a perfectly reasonable career. The same is true of any number of other employers that she probably considers below her social status. Of course, she won't.
That will teach them for advertising that they help everyone find a job :-)
I can understand her anger at not being able to find a job,
and yeah, pretty much all collages help graduates find jobs, but FFS, she should have picked a better major.
I'm a geek, and I wont even go into a computer sciences or information tech, field, there are 10 times as many
applicants than their are job openings in that field. 10 years ago, anyone with an IT or Comp Sci degree would
get hired on the spot, these days, you might as well have a liberal arts degree.
It's obvious that as the entitlement generation grows up we'll see more of this: "I should get a job even though I'm mediocre at what I do and if I don't then I should be able to sue someone".
Let's hope she gets laughed out of court.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Obviously this woman doesn't have a case, but it's still not that hard to sympathise with people who are being pushed into higher education on the back of all the "you must have a degree to get a good job" and "knowledge-based economy" bullshit that's put about these days. Most of these folks would be better off learning an honest trade.
Can anyone explain what is a C in the US in the percentile range? Is this synonymous with miserable failure? What about the reputation of Monroe College?
Is she an average or plain-awful student?
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
I really hope this chick loses the case, and gets saddled with a bunch of court costs to add to her student loans, that way nobody will ever try anything so stupid again. Three month job-hunt? In this economy? College education is no guarantee of a job, and if you can't sell yourself, you're going to be unemployed for a lot longer than that. Your college can't convince employers to give you a job, they can provide some contacts and resources to help you, but that's it.
Oh no... it's the future.
Somehow, many students have the illusion that a degree will bring them to the top automagically. It doesn't work that way. Getting a degree is a good step forward... If they work hard in the university and actually learn. Then they will have to start 3 (or 5) years later in the job market, meaning they will lack many important skills no university teaches and therefor earn less. Even if they learn quickly it takes years to catch up (both in attractiveness on the job market and salary) with those that got into the same field without an university education.
This is true in most fields (including Engineering), but especially true in business administration and management.
The true value of the university education comes after a few years, because many companies have internal rules about giving priority to educated workers. Often there is a hard celing on how far you can get without a master, and it's not unusual for people to go back and get a MBA not only because they need the skills, but also because they need the diploma to continue their career. Some companies even pays for those MBA's to their management.
This is funny because just the other day I was talking with my mother, a director of hiring at a large telco, and she was talking about how the young people she brings in feel entitled.
I told her I agreed, then asked if I could borrow $25. When she said no I wrote the local paper exposing the BULLSHIT THAT THIS IS!
if you don't have any previous work history in a field. I'll freely admit I got both of my IT jobs by referrals from friends and acquaintances already working in the companies.
University/College studies are as much about networking as they are about learning. I spent most of my years in University in our student relaxing room playing boardgames and arguing with fellow students and faculty members. Now people who graduated years before me and have achieved higher positions in companies know me or are my friends and have a good understanding on how I fit in teams/groups. And since we mostly argued about our studies at hand they know that even though my grades weren't top notch I knew my stuff.
Of course this doesn't work at all if you're an asshole. You have to stand out somehow, but red flagging yourself for good by suing your school for your own failures is about the worst thing you could possibly do.
If she's so motivated to sue someone because "she doesn't get what she wants," why doesn't she use her business degree and start her own business. Find a niche and go with it. It will be more rewarding. The downside, based upon her attitude, is that the only person she could blame then is herself. Unless she sues the customers of the world for not buying her product/service.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
Maybe next time they'll think before running a subject called "How to sue people for profit"
For not teaching her about how stupid it is to file frivolous lawsuits.
From TFA:
Thompson says she has not hired an attorney to represent her because she cannot afford one.
When she filed her complaint, she also filed a "poor person order," which exempts her from filing fees associated with the lawsuit.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
If advertising didn't work, there wouldn't be so much of it.
Universities in .au, probably elsewhere as well, have been selling themselves increasingly for their job training and less for the concept of a liberal education for decades now.
Only a few go to university now to be simply educated, most are going to uni To Get A Job: it is an almost compulsory step between high school and any professional job. And most technical jobs. I wonder sometimes when more universities will go into more trade training, trying to steal business from technical schools. (As opposed to places like RMIT and Swinburn going the other way: technical colleges who became universities.)
And so, when university is sold as something which will get you a job, these expectations are built. Reasonably or not. (In my opinion, not.) But the trend is there, nonetheless.
A University education has gone from something needed for certain jobs, to something needed for certain classes of work, to a sine-qua-non of employment in entire sections of the workforce. And the universities have been competing with each other to advertise how good they are at giving an education which improves the student's chances of getting a job â" a good job, a desirable job â" advertising which might give the impression that such a job is practically guaranteed: that you go to this uni or that one not because of the education you get, but because of the job you are all but promised to walk into when you graduate. (Before you graduate, even, with graduate placements and the like.)
Personally, I think the uni sector would be better off selling the quality of the education itself, rather than expectations of the utilitarian results.
But I only work for a university, and as professional staff at that, so there is no hope that my opinion carries the slightest weight whatsoever.
"This is a Hollywood movie: when it comes to the Laws of Physics, they're lucky if they get Gravity!" --- my wife
She suggested that Monroe's Office of Career Advancement shows preferential treatment to students with excellent grades. "They favor more toward students that got a 4.0. They help them more out with the job placement," she said.
You had a 2.7 GPA, with a "bachelor of business administration degree in information technology", and a "solid attendance record".
Okay, Trina, you've probably never heard this before, but I'll be frank. Those people with 4.0 GPAs are all probably much smarter than you are. If you had, say, a 3.5 GPA (and perhaps a more serious degree), that might not be the case. It makes sense for people to give them preferential treatment when it comes to employment in jobs that require intelligence and skills specific to their fields.
Considering that you're so lacking in integrity and responsibility that you decided to sue the school because you couldn't find an employer, I'll go out on a limb and say that those people are --in all honesty-- better than you. Had you not responded with such a childish action, I might hesitate to say that. Alas, that is not the case.
If you're unhappy with this, too bad. You can try harder, but now that you've made an ass out of yourself on national news, I don't think you'll convince anyone otherwise.
Now, try not to go get pregnant a dozen times.
A lot of people seem to think this is about her sense of entitlement - I'm not so sure. I suspect this is more about her moral character, or lack thereof. While I realize there is a lawyer boogeyman conservatives like to drag out whenever an apparently frivolous lawsuit makes the news, there are definitely a few people whose first thoughts immediately jump to lawsuits and "how much can I get?" at even the slightest hint of perceived wrong (which, in this case, I guess does boil down to a sense of entitlement after all). We can blame the lawyers, and I often do; but for each case like this there's also a willing client who's only thought is one regarding money.
#DeleteChrome
"...As Thompson sees it, any reasonable employer would pounce on an applicant with her academic credentials, which include a 2.7 grade-point average and a solid attendance record..."
She's got it backwards. Aquarium algae can get a 2.0 GPA with a little training. If all the poor, dumb little chit can manage is a 2.7, then she'd be better off claiming she skipped two thirds of her classes and spent the whole last term drunk. At least that way, an employer might think she had brains and a commitment to doing the job right.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Part of the reason they have to raise their prices faster than inflation is because the government-supplied part of their funding is steadily being withdrawn, and the money has to come from somewhere. It's pretty simple math, really:
Cost = Facilities + (# of Students * # of courses per student) + research budget
Income = Gov. Grants + Tuition + Donations + Industry Grants
If you reduce the income, then something from the cost has to go down.
If you reduce the research budget, then Industry Grants will also dry up, further reducing the Income, so that's not going to work.
If you reduce the facilities, you don't have places to put the students.
If you reduce the students or courses, you lose Tuition, and Income goes down further.
That means that you _must_ keep the Income balanced with the Cost. Politicians however look at it and say "Bah! Nobody needs nunna that thar book lernin'! Ah'll jus take their budget ta pay fer mah fishin' industry project this month." So the Cost has not changed, but the Income has gone down.
And then more and more students enrol, increasing cost out of proportion to the respective increase in Income due to more tuition being paid. (Guess what? Your degree costs the University more than you paid in Tuition!)
The _ONLY_ way that the rising spiral of costs can be dealt with is to either increase tuition (which reduces the number of students as well, thus reducing the costs and bringing it closer to balance) or to find some other source of income. In the current economy, how much money do you donate to your local university? Not very much I'd wager.
You are generally unemployable coming out of any University. A University teaches you the theory of the subject matter and how to learn. Its up to you to take those learning skills and master its practical application in the real world.
It's only them do you become employable/useful in a commercial environment. Otherwise you don't stand a chance of getting a job over other students who do (unless of course you took a minor in bull-sh*ting).
This idea that some (many?) students have that a degree is all they should need to be the ideal candidate. Ummmm, no, not so much. You ought to be smart enough to notice that what you are being taught is highly theoretical in nature. Universities aren't tech schools, they aren't teaching you specific skills needed for specific jobs, they are institutions of higher education and research. They deal heavily in the theoretical. This is quite noticeable if you pay any attention in class at all.
Thus, you should take something away from this: The university isn't giving me all I need to be an ideal job candidate. Practical experience is something you need to go and get on your own. My recommendation, especially for IT, is to get a job on campus doing just that. Now I'm a little biased, I work professionally doing IT on campus so we hire students. However, it is a good way to get some extra money and a great way to get some practical experience. All in all, it seems to work out ok for our students. They seem to go on to get jobs. Heck one guy got his bachelors in computer engineering, went on to another school and got his masters, then decided "Know what? I don't really want to be an engineer, I want to do support," and went to work as a support guy. While they appreciated the masters degree, they cared more about his time spent as a support guy.
For tech stuff I recommend university jobs since there seem to be plenty of them, and they have no problem hiring students, of course. A student position must, by definition, be filled by a student of the university. Universities also like student positions since they are cheap. However there's other places you can look at, or internships, or perhaps even just working on projects on your own time. Whatever, the point is to try and get some real, practical experience, not just a good theoretical education.
Also it really annoys me the idea that some graduates have that they should get a "high level" position. Ummmm, no. You have little experience, that is the definition of entry level. The idea that you'd start out in a higher level job is rather silly. After all, if a BS did that, then the majority of people would be starting out in high level jobs, making them not high level. If you are a new graduate, well then accept the fact that you are at the "entry level" of the work force. Goes double if this is your first job period.
You can't teach intelligence and age dont cure stupid.
There's a fairly widespread belief that people with a higher education are probably smarter than people without one - this girl very much disproves that. When I was in law school, it was full of less than brilliant minds to be sure, some I wouldn't even have trusted to cook me a burger at the local Mmmshack.
Q: How long was the six-day war?
A: Six meters
Prof Swaminathan: According to therory of relativity... mumbo jumbo... six meters = six days. QED. So full credit to the student.
You get the drift.
Well, at least this suit brought back fond memories. Thanks.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I had a 4.0 GPA from a top 10 university, but couldn't land a Deloitte internship. Ultimately, I got a job by reference. As any worthy nerd would imagine, this does not land well with one's ego. The job market is currently in a situation which can irrevocably steal your sense of self worth. What this student has done is an simply an act of exasperation and desperation.
When I graduated (2003'ish), we hadn't yet recovered from the dot.com bubble bursting. I knew people with actually useful academic credentials that took longer than 3 months to get a job. Since the media keeps telling me we're now in a recession, somehow it seems like this idiot's expectations are WAY out of whack. The only way someone like that would get hired so quickly would be in a boom with a serious shortage of people.
Ok -- this girl is a brat, I will not for a second say that she is not. I will not, however, immediately dismiss this lawsuit as being frivolous -- a lot of schools advertise heavily on their job placement programs. If she chose to attend this school, and she chose to give them tens of thousands of dollars on a promise that they would offer her a great deal of help in finding a job upon graduation, then she certainly does have a right to be upset about, as that is blatant false advertising. I know how this thing works from experience -- the school I attended (which shall remain nameless) made a huge to-do about their career assistance programs before I chose to attend and rack up $40,000 in debt. Upon graduation, I realized that their career placement was not much more than what I would have gotten off of monster.com. Granted, I was not dumb enough to depend on this and found work on my own, but I do feel ripped off.
The bottom line is, if you are going to advertise a particular service, you had better be prepared to put your money where your mouth is.* These schools need to learn that they cannot get away with making false promises to get you in the door, it is false advertising, and is nothing less than grand larceny.
*I know very well that this is likely not the case, it seems that she is more upset that she still doesn't have a job DESPITE the services being offered -- if the school is living up to their end of the bargain this girl is just an idiot, as opposed to being an idiot with a legitimate complaint. Regardless of whether or not the school is providing the necessary services, she is a 'tard for expecting to have a job 4 months after graduation with a 2.7 GPA, and even more of a 'tard for relying solely on the school's career placement to help her, as everyone knows that they are generally bullshit. This will not work out well for her, but if she is successful, it could work out well for future students in giving schools a bit more incentive to be honest.
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
I felt like I should share my story here.
I got my degree in interdisciplinary studies (Mathematics and IT) and have a fair GPA (I had chronic health issues through college) and have now submitted my 234th application+resume for jobs going from traders joe's to small it companies to IT healthcare to government jobs requiring clearance. Unfortunately most retail/wage jobs are not available due to the shrinking economy and you can only get them if you know people. Where I live you can only get a entry level job by getting security clearance. Problem: I've applied and the fact that I was hospitalized for a mental disorder twice precludes me from that. I am not unable to work and have maintained the problems stemming from a, admittedly severe, case of Type I bipolar disorder and PTSD unusually well. The auditors, despite letters from my all my doctors saying that I was fit for work and capable of handling state secrets didn't want to risk it. At this point I make an odd buck singing as I'm an operatic tenor (full-lyric/spinto) and will probably be able to reenter school under a scholarship for music (tenors who can be heard above a full orchestra and actually have a nice voice are rare). I'm also strongly considering going to cosmetology school as I've got an interest in make-up artistry and hair styling and it's a skill you can take anywhere. Until I get to the point, where I can foster my other talents, I'm applying for disability and SSI.
In the time I've spent now stuck in the house alone in the basement, I've found out that most of what I thought I knew from my college courses was actually watered down shit. I've essentially begun to reteach myself what I thought I knew through old math books that I've gathered from grad students that gave them to a book exchange program. Without projects in programming to work on I can notice my skills eroding and I'm not sure I'd be able to jump right into a job requiring that atm. I would contribute to some open source projects but the bar for the one's I'd like to work on (generally computer algebra systems and numerical computing) is so so high. I would go to grad school only I lack the courses (real analysis mainly) as my college did not provide any of the upper level coursework (at least not seriously [our numerical analysis was done by someone with their MA in math education and she had never touched matlab till two months prior and was technophobic, a complete joke]) necessary for that. I've learned that my degree is essentially worthless in almost every regard.
I was essentially forced to choose this particular school by my parents, who choose it because it's in biking distance and because the school has billboards (I shit you not) advertising that they get students jobs. They boast a 97% employment rate. They also host career fairs and have services for resume counseling and do hound you to use them. However, most of the fairs center around the schools most successful areas: nursing and accounting. They were once an all women 2-year school about a decade and some years ago, so this come as no surprise. They are also lead by a president who has amazing capabilities in manipulating figures. It took me a long while to realize that our ratings were mostly manufactured and overstated.
Now, however, after looking around at my graduating peers and listening to their stories, I realize that my school was not the only offender. In fact, there are a number of schools just like mine that have become, as one slashdotter here put it, 'degree manufactures'. They essentially live by manufacturing mediocre graduates, and taking their savings in the process, and consequentially flooding the workforce and devaluing degrees of talented people. I am at odds to decide though which category I fall in here. My degree is worthless in consideration of the fact that it failed to help me get a job and I learned little of my actual knowledge in the classes taken in pursuit of it. However I am (and I say this with the utmost confidence) more capable in what it prescribes then
Your post proves my point.
You think she is entitled simply because she threw $70K of her parent's money down the drain and expects it to get her a job.
The reason university graduates of my generation had no problem getting a job was because the standards were much higher: typically only 5% of the population got a degree.
University is not and shouldn't be for everybody.
So yes, you're right, the standard of graduates has gone downhill since then: which is why so many of them can't get jobs.
They're the unemployable 'me me me' entitlement generation.
Another way of putting it is evolution in action: at least you failures are less likely to reproduce.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
> That she expects to earn a large amount of money by being immediately put into a "management" position and paid vast sums of money solely due to the fact that she is such a wonderful person and "deserves" to be a manager with a large salary.
What are you talking about? Any half-competent career services department should be able to see that anyone that lawsuit-happy who has that big of a sense of entitlement has a bright future at the RIAA (or any of the other MAFIAA franchises).
This is just a simple matter of matching up the person's personality and skill set to the right organization...
Bull. There has never been trouble getting a job. There has always been trouble getting a job you want.
Meanwhile the advantage that college graduates once had has evaporated due to the change in supply/demand. Now that so many people are college graduates, being a college graduate is no longer special. Doubly so now that curricula and grade-inflation and such have taken their toll. When my father got his MBA, one of the requirements for graduating was to visit a real-world company and solve a random serious real-world problem it had.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
So, let me get this straight. A graduate from a [insert random no-name college here] obtains a [rather generic, non-specific] degree in "IT", and automagically expects to be hired in 3 months or less?
Forget economy or GPA for a second, what the hell ever happened to getting your damn feet wet in IT outside of a fucking classroom?
You want someone to hire you? Drop the ego and intern for a short while. Find out how good you are in the real world before you start assuming a piece of paper is your automagic meal ticket. Might also want to pick up a newspaper every now and then to see how long it's taking the average job with experience to land a job.
You been tellin' me you're a genius
Since you were seventeen
In all the time I've known you
I still don't know what you mean
The weekend at the college
Didn't turn out like you planned
The things that pass for knowledge
I can't understand
--Reelin' In the Years by Steely Dan
A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver --Proverbs 25:11
Just found this article in which the "Ski Channel" is going to offer her a job:
Whenever I read a headline like this I think to myself, "Alright, some jackass is trying to get a bunch of attention. Surely there must be more to this story."
Imagine my surprise when I realized that, no, the title is 100% accurate. Amazing.
-William Brendel
Please.
There have been numerous recessions, and every generation has had to deal with downturns. Now it's our turn.
people have had their education disregarded and been forced to train their indian and chinese replacements long before the credit market hit the skids.
FTA's with nations which don't have socio-economic parity has caused this mess.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Jobs should be allocated on skills. Not paper. The process of getting the paper should give you the skills. If not, it's worthless.
If the course is looking worthless, perhaps it is, and it's not worth wasting more time and money on it. If you spent 3 years of your life doing a worthless course, what does it say about you? You're left 3 years older and still lacking the required skills.
I dropped out of a virtual reality course (name should have been a clue, but I was young and naive) after a year and a half because all my learning was self taught and the course interfered. It was all very disappointing and depressing. Dropping out was like a weight off my shoulders. I spent six months moving my C++ programming from the Acorn to Windows and then got a job doing 3D engine programming. It's nearly a decade later now and I have seen very "qualified" programmers not worth the space they use up. I'm sure some of the good programmers I know are better for having done "good" courses, but I don't think a good course can make a bad programmer good and plenty of good programmers who did "bad" courses have told me it was a waste of time.
Ultimately I think market forces have caused many courses to set the bar too low, and not to raise it high enough during the course (or recruiting of lecturers?). Maybe some come back from people who complete the courses and come out without employable skills is a good thing.
What a great example of the product of a politically correct society where the expectations of entitlement abound. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for her.
Yes, the job market is tough right now. I know, because with 20 years of IS/IT experience, it recently took me over 2 months of uncertainty and doubt to land a local IT job. I could have gotten a job elswhere in the country, but I choose to stay local, so I had to accept that it would take me longer to find a job.
There are absolutely no guarantees for employment whether it be in finding employment or keeping it. From the recent graduate to those who are "solidly employed", there are zero guarantees. Your job can be offshored quicker than you can say Bangalore, and in states that have "at will" laws, your job can end immediately without notice.
Time for the Obvious Police to arrive on the scene. Sorry, but this isn't a socialist country yet. Those who perform well get preferential treatment. It's called a free market, and it's the way of business. The phrase "Everyone's a winner" just doesn't apply in the business world.
That's not what they planned? That's not what they planned? WTF? This girl really needs a kick in the pants and a good dose of some reality pills. It's called life. Things aren't just given to you. You have to earn them.
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
My favorite part is "She suggested that Monroe's Office of Career Advancement shows preferential treatment to students with excellent grades. "They favor more toward students that got a 4.0. They help them more out with the job placement," she said."... This is the inevitable result of the 'Everyone Gets A Trophy Just For Playing' Generation. \ Hey, she showed up. She did 'all right'. She wants her pay-off now. What did we, as a nation, expect? We tell our children that everyone should be treated the same, that winning isn't as important as playing, and pat them on the back and reward them for attendance. Now she is an adult and wants a reward for attendance and thinks its unfair the students who worked harder to be the best are getting preferential treatment. This is not her issue. It is our issue. My fear is that there will be many more Ms. Thompsons graduating.
Her lawyer is supposed to tell her that her case is frivolous, because there's no reasonable argument that the liability is the school's, not hers. But instead her lawyer is suing. They're supposed to protect the court, and thereby the public which funds and depends on the court, from frivolous lawsuits.
Courts should be throwing out a lot more of these cases as frivolous. Opposing lawyers should be arguing that the other lawyer's case is frivolous. When a lawyer brings a case ruled frivolous, they should pay a fine equal to the average judgment award in cases of that type. A second frivolous ruling should suspend the lawyer for six months, and require they pass the bar exam again in that state to continue practicing. A third frivolous ruling should strip them permanently of their license in that state, disbarment. And any frivolous ruling in any state should cause them to go through hearings in every state in which they're licensed to determine whether that strike should count in that state too, towards eventual disbarment there. Not to mention what their insurance policy should charge once they've demonstrated their high risk.
Being a lawyer is a privilege that is equal to easy profits (there's never a shortage of drunk driving cases for money). Abusing the privilege that the public subsidizes at every step, in the delivery of justice essential to a functional society, should see that privilege stripped as soon as it can justly be stripped. Let these frivolous lawyers get jobs in the circus, where clowns are to be laughed at instead of respected.
--
make install -not war
Whatever her GPA is, she has worked hard for four years
Negative.
She's got a 2.7 GPA. That isn't outstanding, that's average. That isn't hard work, that's showing up to class and doing what you're told. I'd accept that she'd worked hard if she walked out of there with a 3.0+ GPA. A 2.7? Nope.
spent $70k on it
So?
If I spent $100k on a college education am I now more deserving of a job than she is? What if I go to a community college and only spend $20k? Am I less deserving?
very willing and able to work
Maybe.
I don't know her, you don't know her. We don't know how badly she wants a job. Maybe she feels this lawsuit is a better way to get some money than flipping burgers is. And able to work? I guess we'd have to sit her down in some kind of workplace environment to evaluate that, wouldn't we? Just because you've got a degree doesn't mean you're actually capable of doing the work.
I don't know how many bachelor degree holders there is
There are lots of folks with a Bacheolor's in something. It really doesn't mean much. Four years isn't really enough time to teach you a whole lot of specialization... And a four-year degree isn't going to focus on a specific set of skills either. There'll be lots of general education, lots of theory...
I always tell people that a Bachelor's degree proves one thing - a capacity to learn. Nothing more.
she likely has more education than 70% of the population
Education is borderline meaningless once you enter the job market. Nobody cares what book you read or how you scored on your exams - they want to know if you can do the job. Someone with 2 years experience doing the job (but no degree) has a better track record than someone with a 4.0 GPA coming right out of college. That's why internships are critically important. That's why you want to tinker in your free time and build up a portfolio that you can show potential employers. That's why folks take crap jobs right out of college to build up their resume.
And she can't get a job
Sure she can. Just not the job she wants.
I guarantee you there are jobs that she's qualified to do, but doesn't want - like WalMart, or McDonald's. I guarantee you there are jobs available that she's not qualified to do - like civic engineering or carpentry or something. The trick isn't finding a job, the trick is finding a job that you want.
I worked at Electronics Boutique for a year after I graduated with my BS in Computer Science... Then I worked as an Adjuct Professor at a local community college for another year... Then I finally found a job that actually involved doing what I went to school for - two years after graduation.
It just is not fair
Welcome to the real world. No, it isn't fair. Nothing is. Fairness is an artificial construct. In the real world nobody is going to give you a job just to be fair. You've got to earn your keep, just like everyone else out there.
Kids today aren't entitled, they are screwed over
I disagree.
The vast majority of "kids" I deal with these days have a crippling sense of entitlement. Interviewing people is downright painful. The attitude seems to be "I've show up to claim my job" instead of "let me prove to you that I'll be a good investment"
The older generation didn't have to take bullshit like this. There were no trouble getting a job back then
Really?
Despite the obvious problems with your overgeneralization... I do, mostly, agree. There was a time when this nation was built on the backs of skilled laborers. If you were willing to sweat, you were able to get a job. And there weren't usually enough bodies
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
The older generation didn't have to take bullshit like this. There were no trouble getting a job back then, especially not for college graduates. Things have gone quite a bit downhill since then.
Every generation has had trouble finding good jobs. There are always notable exceptions when a particular field is hot, and of course the economy goes up and down. And I'll grant you that it's not your fault how the economy is doing 22 years after you were born. But it's too bad you can't tell my grandparents that they had it easy in the Great Depression. You'd get off their lawns in hurry, and with nothing to console you but your shelf of participation trophies.
Like a lot of people, I graduated into a bad economy. Fortunately my GPA was a little better than a 2.7, so grad school was an option.
Yes, college is considerably more expensive these days, even after inflation. There used to be much more direct and indirect federal support. I sure hope your generation registers to vote and then remembers to vote for its own best interests. Your parents' generation got way too hung up on whatever "values" were being preached at the time, and got skinned alive in the bargain. Probably won't help you, but maybe you can change something for your kids.
I am not a crackpot.
Paula, is that you?
What?
"At Monroe, students take a Liberal Arts core and combine it with their program of choice to ensure a well rounded, comprehensive education. Programs include Accounting, Baking and Pastry, Business Management, Criminal Justice, Culinary Arts, General Business, Health Services Administration, Hospitality Management, Information Technology, Medical Administration, Medical Assisting, Nursing, and Public Health."
This mishmash of subjects doesn't inspire confidence in Monroe's academic focus, and one wonders about the academic rigour of its courses. It doesn't appear to be a traditional degree mill, but there's a disturbing vagueness behind the gushing self-adulatory rhetoric that sounds a warning note.
A mediocre degree from such an institution can't be expected to give its graduates any hope of beating stiff competition from traditional degrees awarded by more substantial institutions.
Some years back, I was working I.T. at a midsize college in New York. The local supermarket was almost entirely staffed by people with Bachelor's and Master's degrees -- the clerks and stockboys were are "highly educated" and only working there until they could find a better job. They were relatively transient, of course, which is why the store management never changed: they only had high school degrees, but they lived locally.
Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
If universities issue degrees for people that are not qualified enough, their degrees have no value, and they aren't much less of a fraud than if I start printing degrees in an ink jet printer. They don't fail people because they prefer to milk their money. The employers are also to blame, because they are lazy, and it's easy to filter people based on them having a degree or not. So people end getting a degree because they are required to, even if the quality of these universities suck.
Yep. I had never even HEARD of Monroe College and I grew up in the northeast. Does anyone else notice an uncanny similarity between the blue and yellow logos at Monroe College and Monro Muffler ?
I imagine her expectations were unrealistic, but why is everyone so quick to condemn this girl? Why is it unreasonable to live in the wealthiest country in the world and expect to be able to find gainful employment? When you finish paying out tens of thousands of dollars for a college education, don't you expect to find better work than the local Walmart? If not, then why would you risk carrying so much debt?
Does it help you to sleep better at night telling yourself that ALL the unemployed or underemployed people in this country richly deserve it?
Kind of ironic coming from the crowd that has been working feverishly to develop machines that can replace human labor in a wide variety of jobs.
And a 2.7GPA is an embarrassment. Nothing short than a 3.0 is/should be acceptable as a measure of hard scholastic work. I had a GPA close to 4.0 when I was an undergrad, and that went dipping down to 3.3 at the end of my grad school years. This in Computer Science. I'm embarrassed to say that.
And this tard of a woman thinks it's ok to advertise she has a 2.7GPA from a freaking community college? On Business Administration of Information Technology (whatever the hell that is)?
If she were that intelligent, she would apply to Home Depot (where I worked back in 92-94), and work on the cashier register, then work her way up to the returns/customer service desk, or become a cashier lead, or find her way to work in the store's data processing/reporting office. Having a degree in admin (and on IT), assuming that degree mean some valuable crap, coupled with hard work and lead skills, she would quickly climb the management ladder into department/aile supervisor. That's a type of skill she can build a resume with, which she can later transfer to another job should she wished it.
But that kind of positive, constructive mentality can only come from an intelligent, hard-working and diligent person, not a POS woman who thinks she deserves a job (and has a right to sue her college) because her miserable and embarrasing 2.7GPA didn't materialize into a power-broker position among the managerial echelons.
The funny thing is that I bet the alumni association still calls her every year seeking a donation.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
They want the best workers but want to be "competitive" with salaries.
Whilst they want the best CEO and pay out the nose for it.
They want "at will" employment yet eternal loyalty from the employees.
They want to fire you and not pay you but don't want you working for anyone else.
Counselor: Well I now have the results here of the interviews and the aptitude tests that you took last week, and from them we've built up a pretty clear picture of the sort of person that you are. And 1 think I can say, without fear of contradiction, that the ideal job for you is chartered accountancy.
Mr. Anchovy: But I am a chartered accountant.
Counselor: Jolly good. Well back to the office with you then.
University, despite it's commercial perversion in the years since 1980, is not a trade school.
Although a key to gainful, professional employment may be a classic liberal education, it does not therefore stand that the objective of this education is commercial marketability of graduates. Nor is the measure of education's success the commercial placement of these graduates.
The "liberal" in the term "Liberal Education" refers to it's breadth and fullness of development. This is as opposed to the vocational training of a specific skill-set, solely focused towards career placement.
I have not reviewed this plaintiff's transcript, but I would not be suprised to discover that she showed only cursory interest in those aspects of her education, which did not seem destined to provide professional remuneration. She may well have "chuffed this off", as uninteresting and irrelevant. I have witnessed this myself - especially in younger, contemporary University students:
"Why do I have to learn about Charlemagne!? Who cares!"
Well, I needn't bother to refute the type of vapid ignorance and pathetic intellectual narcissism represented by that incurious statement. Persons of such a view do not belong in Graduate education. They are unlikely to be happy with the institution, nor successful in academic outcome.
Me? I was a monster at my A-Level, then declined the universities for the immediate lure of slacking-off in cafes and night clubs. With a lifelong academic for one parent, I'd understood my temperament would not result in satisfaction on either the part of the school or myself.
Counselor: Er, well, Mr. Anchovy ... I'm afraid what you've got hold of there is an anteater.
Mr. Anchovy: A what?
Counselor: An anteater. Not a lion. You see a lion is a huge savage beast, about five feet high, ten feet long, weighing about four hundred pounds, running forty miles per hour, with masses of sharp pointed teeth and nasty long razor-sharp claws that can rip your belly open before you can say 'Eric Robinson', and they look like this. http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_01/LionBAR0602_468x393.jpg
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
IMHO, there is merit to this. I have two degrees in engineering yet I had a helluva time finding a job. Why? Quite simply, the curriculum was about two years out of date. This was 1990 and what they were teaching lent itself well to working for a defense contractor. Problem was that defense spending had been cut severely and companies weren't hiring much let alone people with no full-time work history. They spent years teaching us to program in Pascal and Ada when the companies that were hiring wanted people with C and C++ experience. The recruitment experience at the school was a joke. You didn't have the internet to help you find prospective employers or post your resumé. So ultimately I had to lower my standards and move from Boston to St. Petersburg, Florida (IMHO, the WORST possible place for a single guy in his early 20s to be). And truth be told, they hired me to do Macintosh programming which I had never done before so clearly they were desperate. IMHO, if you are getting a technical education, it is the school's responsibility to teach current marketable skills.
The vast majority of "kids" I deal with these days have a crippling sense of entitlement. Interviewing people is downright painful. The attitude seems to be "I've show up to claim my job" instead of "let me prove to you that I'll be a good investment"
That may not actually be a sense of entitlement. In college, when nearing graduation, we were given interview advice. The important parts to remember were "be confident" and "they're not just interviewing you, you're also interviewing them". I can easily see people overdoing it and looking like they have a crippling sense of entitlement.
Although a key to gainful, professional employment may be a classic liberal education, it does not therefore stand that the objective of this education is commercial marketability of graduates. Nor is the measure of education's success the commercial placement of these graduates.
Universities are selling a product. As with any merchant, their success is measured by their ability to provide a service that people want at a price they are willing to pay, while making a profit at it.
The thing is, their customer base has changed radically over the years. Society now requires an increasing number of specialized and intellectually demanding skills. Universities are, whether we like it or not, the place where those skills are bought and sold. This has transformed the university from a playground for the wealthy (who need not care about mundane things like employability) to the gateway to a decent career path for a huge segment of society.
This transformation means employment is now THE critical aspect of this education, not the well-rounded liberal arts education that was the goal of its former customer base. Universities know this well, which is why they market themselves with an eye towards their customers' future career prospects.
That's not to say that people don't care about the liberal arts aspect. We do... but for most university students, it's no longer the driving force behind undergraduate education. Few are willing to put themselves into years' worth of debt simply to become a more well-rounded individual. They do it so they can have a better career and quality of life. The liberal part of the education is simply a bonus.
It's just a case of balancing the breadth of a liberal education with the depth of an employable career discipline. That way we get an education that is both liberal and useful.
"Why do I have to learn about Charlemagne!? Who cares!"
Well, I needn't bother to refute the type of vapid ignorance and pathetic intellectual narcissism represented by that incurious statement.
And I needn't bother to refute the arrogance that assumes everyone should simply hand over their hard-earned money for a class without an explanation of why it's worth the cost. It is incumbent on the seller of a product to make its value clear, not a potential buyer. The annals of history are littered with defunct businesses whose clearly wonderful products could find no buyers.
People like to feel like they have options. They dislike feeling like they are stuck with one option, no matter how unpleasant it becomes.
So, employers like feeling like there is a large talent pool available to them. That way they know that when some worker isn't working out, they can just cut him lose and replace him. Having options gives them the ability to optimize their company's productivity and ultimately achieve good success.
When employers feel like they don't have options, they feel like they are being forced to accept expensive, lazy, and talentless workers. Having a team built out of such people will result in the employer's business failing, or a manager's own productivity metrics being shamefully low.
So, it is every bit as natural for employers to prefer a high-unemployment market as it is for workers to prefer a low-unemployment market.
Workers, after all, don't want to feel like they have no choice but to accept a terrible job where they work long hours doing work they hate for a barely-livable (or sub-livable) wage. They would prefer to feel like they can just quit their job if it starts to suck, and move on to a better one.
Each side sees the other one as the evil side. Employees see the employers as the over demanding cruel slave masters who don't care about the employee's livelihoods, and just want to exploit them. Employers see employees as lazy, unskilled, expensive freeloaders who have no devotion to the company (and hence the employer's livelihood) and are just there to make a buck. So, each side feels the need to protect itself from the other side, and prefers economic conditions that are favorable to that protection.
Where I work, both are simultaneously true. The account reps are looking at a very dry employment market, and are desperate to keep their jobs. So, management is leaning on them. They typically work 50 to 60 hour weeks.
However, the tech side is seeing a still relatively open employment market. Each member of our tech team has talent and certifications, and we all know we could find a better job if we need to. So we get an easy 40 hour work week. When management tries to lean on us, we get to choose whether or not we want to give extra. When we chose not to, management just accepts it, because it would be too hard for them to replace us.
Most people on slashdot are laborers, rather than managers, so most of the posts will maintain that it is objectively obvious that low unemployment is good, and that employers are evil exploitive bastards. I don't know if it is true or not, but I DO know that there are two very clear-and-distinct sides to this issue.
2) "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Wizard of Oz
As an aside, it has fallen to me on more than one occasion to interview prospective candidates for positions on my teams. The more I have done so, the more I've come to realize that a degree also doesn't guarantee that the candidate will know anything or be a good employee. As such, I tend to value the attitude of the candidate to my questions, his work experience and contributions to projects such as open source projects over a piece of paper that tells me he's reasonably good at memorizing facts (or cheating.) I am fairly certain that if anyone approaches the interview with a positive attitude and engages the interviewer rather than just sitting there like a cabbage or something, they will have a very good chance of landing the job. A lot of people come to the interview with the attitude that it's a chore they'd rather not have to do, and trust me on this that attitude comes through very clearly during the interview. And if you're going to be like that during the interview, odds are you're going to be like that on the job as well.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
So your complaint is that a system not originally designed for something is not quickly adapting to fulfill the role left vacant by the closure of most vocational schools? (In the US anyways.) Or that their is a trend of pushing any student through college even though their aren't enough jobs for all those students? Not to mention many of these students shouldn't have even gone to a college or university? Are you seriously complaining that they should change how they work because the "market" demands someone fulfill this role? It is being fulfilled, albeit imperfectly. If it's such an issue then more vocation style schools would appear, oh wait we have those too (ex: ITT Tech)! Plenty of us succeed by using the "old" college/university system, however passing through one of these establishments is by no means a guarantee of future success. To sum it up: most of the time, it's your own dam fault.
"Now you know, and knowing is half the battle!"
On July 24, she filed suit against the college in Bronx Supreme Court, alleging that Monroe's "Office of Career Advancement did not help me with a full-time job placement. I am also suing them because of the stress I have been going through."
Her complaint is that the college advertises full-time job placement help and she is not receiving that service. That's not the same as claiming that she is suing because she does not have a job. The fact that she doesn't have a job yet given her "outstanding credentials" is evidence cited to support her claim that the college is not providing the services they advertised.
From a strictly legal standpoint false advertisement is a legitimate reason to sue. I just don't think she has much of a case.
Personally, though I understand her frustration, I think her attitude stinks. I graduated with a 3.2 GPA from a top three engineering school (the public one that doesn't inflate grades) with a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. During my studies many people commented that I would have no problem finding a job right out of college which I thought was great but also unimportant since there wasn't anything else I really liked studying or doing. Unfortunately, for me I graduated in 2001 right after the dot com bubble burst. *Soup Nazi voice* No job for YOU!!! I had to work my ass off to get an unpaid internship then bust my butt to move up from there to better companies and better jobs. It took me almost 7 years to finally get my career where I want it to be. In my experience, if you want results you're better off improving the things you can (yourself) then trying to change things you can't control.
Universities are selling a product. As with any merchant, their success is measured by their ability to provide a service that people want at a price they are willing to pay, while making a profit at it.
Diploma mills sell degrees. Universities provide an education and examine degrees. The service they provide is for a much wider community than the students. Even in the US many universities are heavily subsidized by tax payers, and the base of stake holders much wider. The service they provide includes the preservation, creation and transmission of knowledge and these are vital but to the economy and the culture of a country. They also provide a service to employers of producing graduates with some indications in their transcript and references of their suitability for certain types of employment.