Slashdot Mirror


President By Day, High-Tech Headhunter By Night

theodp writes "The White House is following up on an offer made by President Barack Obama this week to help find a job for an unemployed semiconductor engineer in Texas. The offer was made during a live online town hall after the ex-TI engineer's wife questioned the government's policy concerning H-1B visa workers. Obama asked for EE Darin Wedel's resume and said he would 'forward it to some of these companies that are telling me they can't find enough engineers in this field.' While grateful, patent-holder Wedel said the president's view on the job prospects for engineers in his field 'is definitely not what's happening in the real world.' Duke adjunct professor Vivek Wadhwa offered his frank take on 40-year-old Wedel's predicament: 'The No. 1 issue in the tech world is as people get older, they generally become more expensive. So if you're an employer who can hire a worker fresh out of college who is making $60,000 versus an older worker who is making $150,000, and the younger worker has skills that are fresher, who would you hire?' Coincidentally, Texas Instruments sought President Obama's help in reducing restrictions on the hiring of younger foreign workers in 2009, the same year it laid off Wedel."

12 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. Old is gold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if you're an employer who can hire a worker fresh out of college who is making $60,000 versus an older worker who is making $150,000, and the younger worker has skills that are fresher, who would you hire

    Dont the older ones come with experience?
    As an example (though not valid in this case, but still shows the point), a more experienced person would know to avoid using floats to save monetary values,etc...
    In the tech industry, as in management, the top spots are obviously fewer than entry level, so over time many people will stagnate when climbing the ladder

    1. Re:Old is gold? by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Depends. Is it the difference between a product up to spec as per contract and an emergency fix that costs 90k to implement or a schedule slip with a 90k lateness penalty?

    2. Re:Old is gold? by cosm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      willing to work 80 hours a week and call it 40

      This. The 'end' of overtime is infuriating. If you're salary perhaps there are exceptions in that it's understood as such, ie the financial security of salary is repayed by the occasional 50-80 week to get the job done. But if you're hourly and being 'payed' for a full '40' pseudosalary-style (seen this many places), and being worked 60+ on a consistent basis, well, fuck that. I've known shops where everybody is getting paid an hourly wage on the checks for 40 a week, but you were an immediate outcast if you didn't come in 2 hours early and stay 2 hours late every gd day.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    3. Re:Old is gold? by forkfail · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sad thing is, the experienced guy can often get done in 20 what it takes the new guy 80 to do, but to a certain type of managers, all he sees is that the old guy goes home after 40, and the young guy is working away over the weekend....

      --
      Check your premises.
    4. Re:Old is gold? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sad thing is, the experienced guy can often get done in 20 what it takes the new guy 80 to do, but to a certain type of managers, all he sees is that the old guy goes home after 40, and the young guy is working away over the weekend....

      Bingo. The young bloods will flail away for 3 weeks to come to solution Z, after going through A, B, C, X and Y. The old guy can look at it and say "Yeah, we saw this concept 8 years ago. Solution Z is what you want. Hang on a sec, let me find my original design. Put it in a new wrapper, but no need to redesign the basic concept"
      (channeling my inner Space Cowboy)

    5. Re:Old is gold? by tgd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was cocky in my 20's and 30's. I thought I owned the world and every big-name company I worked for 'stroked' me. but when I hit 40, things changed. and now that I'm 50, things VERY much changed.

      And there's a lesson that every single person on /. should learn from and learn well -- put your effort into building up your investment and savings nest egg. Someone making upper-tier pay in a technical field, and putting a priority on savings, not living the baller lifestyle, can approach this juncture in a vastly different way. Decisions everyone makes when they're 25, 35, 40, etc all have direct bearing on this. The reality is, this problem happens in EVERY field to everyone as they get older. Your pay will not scale forever, and if you scale your cost of living with your pay, rather than scaling your savings, it will HURT when that trend reverses itself.

      I'm not yet at 50, but I have plenty of friends and coworkers who are. Some of them, at equal pay, are looking at scaling back their work, focusing on consulting, even if their income ends up cut in half. Others are panicked at the slightest possibility of losing their job because they have a few months' expenses saved.

      So, kids, learn a lesson here. When you're comfortable living on $60k a year, and find yourself making $150k a year, you can buy a $70k car and a $500k house, or you can keep right on living comfortably, and putting $50k a year away in investments. 20 years later you'll be facing this decision in a vastly different way.

  2. Fresher skills? by DoninIN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How often in the real world do you find yourself thinking. "Gee he's never really done this before in an applied, practical setting. That makes his skills fresher!" In my case that would be a big never.

  3. Leading question. by forkfail · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if you're an employer who can hire a worker fresh out of college who is making $60,000 versus an older worker who is making $150,000, and the younger worker has skills that are fresher, who would you hire?

    Fresher? Skills aren't vegetables. The older guy is also the wiser and more experienced. He knows the meta behind the skills, and what will work, and what won't. And if he's worth his titles, he has been constantly learning throughout his career. He knows how to be part of a team (even if he never grew into liking to "work with others"), and how to get things done.

    The young guy is going to make a lot of mistakes. What he has is energy and drive, and fresh ideas. But too often, he'll work for 20 hours when an hour of thought would have led to a four hour solution that works better - a solution that would have occurred instantly to the old guy. He'll get the job done, but it won't have the eloquence that the older guy would have brought to the table. Many of his ideas will be naive, but through sheer force of will and energy, he'll make them work. But it'll be ten years before he has the experience to even come close to the depth and perception of the older engineer.

    (Obviously, written by someone who's paid their dues for a couple of decades, and is still doing so.)

    --
    Check your premises.
    1. Re:Leading question. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know this. I know this. Most people on /. know this. Most people who actually do any meaningful work know this.

      But the MBA class, the new nobility, who have thoroughly established their control over the corporate world and are doing their level best to take over other environments as well (the military, medicine, and academia are the places where I've seen it happening; I'm sure there are plenty of others) don't know this, or if they do, they don't care. To them, we're all peasants, and peasants don't have "skills." We're more or less interchangeable, and the only real distinction between us is that younger peasants will work for a smaller portion of scraps and take longer to drop dead in the fields.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Leading question. by usuallylost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All to often management is willing to accept the mistakes new people are going to make simply because it helps the bottom line short term. You layoff an experienced engineer making $150,000 and replace him with a fresh out of college guy making $60,000. In the short term the manager cuts the cost of his division and looks more profitable. If they have costs later on because of some problem that the more experienced guy would have simply avoided so what. By the time that happens the manager who made the decision will have usually pocketed his bonuses and moved on. So it is the next guy who is suddenly stuck fixing whatever went wrong. From my point of view this is just more of the same MBA mentality that is one of the factors wrecking American business.

  4. Re:Experience trumps by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And maybe the more experienced people indeed do have to consider lowering their sights.

    Or maybe (just maybe) employers and government officials should stop stabbing them in the back ... because that is precisely what they've been doing. And as America's decline from the pre-eminent industrial power to another third-world outfit looking for a handout continues, you'll eventually begin to understand what I mean. Sometimes you do have to take care of your own.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  5. Re:On the campaign trail by Uberbah · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because shipping, cheap 3rd world labor and international communications didn't exist in the 50's? What kept corporations from leaving the U.S. in droves then, along with the rich when levied with a 91% marginal tax rate?