Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Companies More Likely To Outsource Than Train IT Employees

Posted by Soulskill on from the flatten-and-reinstall dept.

snydeq writes "IT pros feeling the pressure to boost tech skills should expect little support from their current employers, according to a recent report on IT skills. '9 in 10 business managers see gaps in workers' skill sets, yet organizations are more likely to outsource a task or hire someone new than invest in training an existing staff. Perhaps worse, a significant amount of training received by IT doesn't translate to skills they actually use on the job.'"

6 of 235 comments (clear)

  1. A sign of buisness culture failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A manager is insulated from the real costs of hiring a new employee, whereas costs for training for an existing employee show up nice and neatly on his budget.
    Why? HR. HR ensures it's own existence by hiding the costs of new hires. Managers are happy to take advantage of this.

    1. Re:A sign of buisness culture failure by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Take this a step further, and you reach the situation I'm currently in. It is virtually impossible to find entry level jobs right now. Every place I have looked is only looking for experienced workers for jobs that are little more than entry level. They don't want to make the effort to train a new hire, they want someone who is already trained. These days companies do not want to invest in their employees at all. They look only to the short term and not the long term. They don't want employees at all. They want mercenaries that they can hire to do a job and drop and hire new ones whenever they want.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  2. Re:This just in! by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually the idea that a company should be loyal to its employees started to die about 20 years ago, thanks to useful idiots like yourself that argue in favor of lowering the value of labor, and giving companies a pass on not being responsible citizens.

  3. Re:This just in! by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes even in the booming 90s companies kept demanding more Visas so they could hire outside help, rather use existing unemployed U.S. engineers.

    I've been a contractor 10+ years now because they'd rather hire temps than permanents. Also there's an age bias towards younger workers (under 40) who have no family and don't mind working unpaid overtime.

       

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  4. Re:This just in! by couchslug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter what you do. There is no profit incentive to "loyalty" in many jobs. Your labor is worth what someone will pay you for it.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  5. Re:This just in! by aergern · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Then they shouldn't should whine when no one can afford what they product. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Which is why the banks should have never been bailed out and the auto industry should never had bailouts or loans. If we are in a true capitalist society .. and these "corporations" make bad decisions .. fuck them .. let them die and new companies take their place. Why should society prop them up if as an entity they care about nothing but profits. *shrug*

    --
    Tell me what you believe...I'll tell you what you should see.