Slashdot Mirror


IT Positions Some of the Toughest Jobs To Fill In US

coondoggie writes "Forty-nine percent of U.S. companies are having a hard time filling what workforce management firm ManpowerGroup calls mission-critical positions within their organizations. IT staff, engineers and 'skilled trades' are among the toughest spots to fill. The group surveyed some 1,300 employers and noted that U.S. companies are struggling to find talent, despite continued high unemployment, over their global counterparts, where 34% of employers worldwide are having difficulty filling positions."

50 of 886 comments (clear)

  1. Salaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they are hard to fill because they dont pay enough?

    1. Re:Salaries by SJHillman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      After I gave notice at my last job, my boss complained it was hard to replace me - and not because of a lack of applicants. In a nutshell, he said that all of the applicants either had zero relevant experience or they had great experience and tech skills but had absolutely no interpersonal skills. I've found that the ability to talk to non-technical people is more important to most hiring managers simply because it's a lot easier to train someone to be technical than it is to train them to work with people.

    2. Re:Salaries by captbob2002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That seems to be the case that I see. Positions that want YEARS of experience, long lists of certifications, and pay around $34,000.

      Same with any other area, there is no shortage of people wanting jobs, there *is* a shortage of people wanting to be slaves. Shouldn't "market forces" tell these "job creators" that they are not paying enough?

    3. Re:Salaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe they're asking IT employes to be able to fill in for five roles at once? I'm sorry but a Jack-of-all-trades isn't good enough for specific positions.

      Just as an example, in the Web field, most employers seem to think that someone should be able to go from using Illustrator to writing HTML, CSS and Javascript and coding server-side stuff including databases.

      I'm sorry but in my book, that's three jobs, not one. People who studied in graphic design don't really know anything about coding websites and web coders will only make a mess and security nightmare with your server code.

    4. Re:Salaries by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, that and they are often some of least respected positions in the U.S. There are plenty of people in I.T. fed up with the fact that while it isn't really a "dead end" job, you are always in a bad situation. If you're bad at your job, you just eventually lose it. If you are good at your job, some places will be scared to advance you or, since being good at your job really mean more idle time in I.T., they'll claim it's a place to cut and STILL fire you. There's also that pesky fact that many of the baldy suits can't understand what you do.

      The way I.T. has been handled over the years by the management types is a prime problem in getting people in to the jobs. The I.T. people are smart and they see the "creative" people get respect and they see the pointy-head management get overpaid. It's no surprise that it would lose it's appeal.

    5. Re:Salaries by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Market forces are warped. That is what happens when you can buy laws and that is what is happening now. It's pathetic to see people scream at the free market and purchase legislators at the same time.

    6. Re:Salaries by crazyjj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      there are enough people willing to be slaves.

      Yeah, all you have to do is get them H1B visas.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    7. Re:Salaries by Spazmania · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At my company we call them "folks with broad skill sets." That's who we hire. Hard to keep someone with a too-narrow skill set busy doing work that's of actual value.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    8. Re:Salaries by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wrong. What you meant to say was:

      "Impossible. As every MBA knows, there are no low salaries, only lazy workers."

      It's not economists who are running these companies.

    9. Re:Salaries by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is interesting because what you are saying here is to actually **develop** your workforce.

      Most corporations don't want to do that anymore.

    10. Re:Salaries by Frobnicator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apparently strong network security (packet/protocol level) + network operations background + minor software development + security clearance is an impossible combination to find.

      Ya think?
      - Network security person + clearance. One job.
      - NOC ops + clearance. One job.
      - Part time software development. One job, either part time or contract.

      Don't complain that you can't find somebody stupid enough to attempt to do all three jobs. If they already have their security clearance then their BS filter works just as good as your resume filter. There is no shortage of open jobs that are SINGLE jobs requiring security clearance.

      I've seen my own share of job postings where it is clear the job will be a nightmare just by the way they word it. The classics are like yours, listing multiple full time jobs as a single job, and then mentioning overtime will be requested for the salaried position.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    11. Re:Salaries by Githaron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is why they are having trouble finding anyone. It is also probably why the day of the company/employee loyalty relationship has largely disappeared.

    12. Re:Salaries by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's pathetic to see corporations scream at the free market and purchase legislators at the same time.

      FTFY.

      It would be pathetic, were it coincidental. The fact that it is not makes the act downright fucking evil .

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    13. Re:Salaries by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >>>this particular one has work that's due before they can get through the process

      This job has been open for 6 months. It has zero progress. If you had hired a Non-cleared person with all the skills, he'd already be halfway through the process. And he wouldn't just be sitting around..... an Interim Clearance would be granted which allows the person do other work while he's waiting for the Top Secret to come through. So your project would have some progress, instead of zero.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    14. Re:Salaries by Captain+Hook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only problem I have with this conspiracy theory is that it might be true for some giant company like MS or Intel which has political connections and hires lots of H1Bs

      I think it's an ecosystem problem, if a significant proportion of the IT jobs are being replaced via off-shoring or outsourcing to inshore companies who don't pay as well then for every job lost you've also lost a person keeping their skills up to date and then the next generation see whats happening and say "fuck that, I'll get an MBA instead".

      To start with it probably doesn't have a big affect but by the time you start losing the veterans to promotion and retirement after 10-15 years and haven't got their replacement already trained with some experience then it's too late. You need a certain critical mass of people interested in a career to keep it going or skills will be lost and once they are gone it's incredibly hard to get back at a national level.

      You need people entering the IT careers at the bottom, to have some exposure to different IT career streams and for them to have a certain expectation of being able to develop a life long career out of it, and I don't think anyone really believes that will happen any more.

      It's a self fulfilling prophecy which benefits those to have the ability to influence job markets at the expense of those who don't.

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    15. Re:Salaries by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *nods* since it is often MBAs doing the hiring, they tend to want people like themselves.. extroverted and people-centric.. the problem is people like that generally go get MBAs or other people oriented degrees rather then technical degrees. When engineers are in charge of hiring other engineers things tend to go smoother.

    16. Re:Salaries by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > ...more productive people...

      BUZZ. Thank you. Your whole point is lost by such ignorant language.

      I.T. people keep the organization running from day to day. To pull a Neil Boortz and start to whine about the "productive class" means your opinion should be roundfiled and proves that our upset about the MBA scam is justified.

      I'd bet the first person you reflexively call is one of those "unproductive" people.

    17. Re:Salaries by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd be on board with this if I didn't so often see middle and upper management call "IT" a money-sink. If they actually knew what their IT departments did, they'd be able to quantify it, and recognize that IT departments DO "contribute substantively to the bottom line". They just do it by removing red numbers instead of adding black ones. Saving money and increasing overall productivity is just as important as bringing new money in; perhaps more important, as without the infrastructure, new money can't be targeted.

      This comes from a guy who runs his own small business, so no, I don't have a general hard-on for IT. I just know that "important" and "valued" aren't necessarily the same thing for the crop of MBAs I've dealt with in the past.

    18. Re:Salaries by pnutjam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sounds like you need to work on your project management skills. You have promised a product in a specific timeline when you have no ability to create this product. Meanwhile, you probably underbid someone who could have actually provided said product.

    19. Re:Salaries by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm going to call it an HR problem.

      First, the IT people trend heavily to being introverts and poor people skills in general. So they are pretty much ineffective when it comes to recruiting talent.

      Second, HR has no idea what IT needs, either in skills or personality. So they resort to a list of buzzwords. Anyone who has ever applied to a state position has gone through being rejected because they lacks a single buzzword in their resume, or,. are one month shy of the experience requirements.

      So on the Can't Find Talent statement, I call the ultimate bullshit. They aren't looking and when they do find someone, they stupidly screen them out on stupid, irrelevant requirements.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    20. Re:Salaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Here's the problem:

      Most nerds are very arrogant and think their shit don't stink. They think they're the smartest person in the company because they can configure a computer. They blame everyone else for not recognizing their massive genius. They are angry and stereotype people based on their bad highschool experience. A lot of them have sexist attitudes which are not only toxic, they are illegal.

      Now a business comes along and says "Hey Melvin, we are going to teach you some remedial social skills because you were raised by a Playstation", and the reaction is probably going be to "Fuck you, you stupid jock bully asshole!!"

      Much easier to bury these guys in a datacenter somewhere. Or don't hire them to begin with.

    21. Re:Salaries by mjr167 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesn't matter how brilliant you are if no one is willing to work with you or you cannot communicate your brilliance to others.

    22. Re:Salaries by PRMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now if you prove yourself a hard worker, (and the company is using proper HR policies), The company will see your value as greater and give you a raise, and try harder to retain you.

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I've never seen this anywhere I've worked. There are so many things wrong with that statement it's hard to even know where to begin:

      1. The best IT people are NOT hard working. They are astoundingly LAZY. They write almost nothing and never look like they are doing anything. And yet their code is fast, clean, maintainable and they are always moving to the next project because the last one is in production and butter smooth. It's 100% impossible for an IT outsider to know who the good employees are.

      2. I've never been at a company that used any HR policy that even found good employees period. They SHOULD concentrate on what you accomplished and how much money it made or saved the company. Instead, they usually devolve into twisted popularity contests or seeing who is the most obsequious or who is the best meaningless rule-follower.

      3. I've never been at a company (that wasn't a consulting company) where they gave ANY value to IT workers period. Despite the fact that you are out-earning them 2:1 in some cases and that your IQ is 25-30 points higher than theirs, they treat you like you are some dumb plumber or auto mechanic that dropped out of high school and are overcharging them for fixing their car or something.

      4. Companies will spend a fortune to attract new talent and pay recruiters 10-15% for the privilege. But they have stupid rules in place that PREVENT them from EVER giving a 5% raise to an IT worker no matter how valuable they are. As such, they spend all their time re-training instead of retaining.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    23. Re:Salaries by erp_consultant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "I've never been at a company (that wasn't a consulting company) where they gave ANY value to IT workers period" - That's why I went into consulting. Working in IT support puts you in a cost center in the eyes of senior management. In consulting I am a revenue generator. The difference is night and day in terms of how are you treated.

    24. Re:Salaries by i286NiNJA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We use the term MBA to refer to all the PHB types who have given us headaches over the years but we deserve to be frustrated. Hard work and good performance often goes barely noticed, when you burn out, that's noticed and most IT workers that "self motivate" have no problem self motivating to burnout, I'll do anything you ask without complaint but don't assume that meant it was easy. Also I think we resent getting pushed around by business types who make more than we do and didn't have to work as hard to do it.

      The notion of us competing with our cheaper alternatives is also a source of frustration. Management usually doesn't know they're doing it wrong, they don't listen to IT, the sky doesn't fall right away and they assume that everything went ok. Make a mental note that second guessing the geeks in IT renders good results.

      I like the term technological debt, you get it working cheap today and then pay for it later. Want a project done quick? It already works? Good roll it out we have to move on! The long term cost of dealing with poor documentation or imperfect implementation comes back when your code has you vendor locked into some insanely expensive piece of outdated technology because your code isn't documented well enough to port (Most of today's midrange mainframe users paying 10x to IBM what they would pay for normal enterprise quality hardware).
      Also pile enough of these projects on each other and you pretty much spend all your time fixing this stuff, eventually everything will slow down. This is normal most material on the software development lifecycle states you'll spend most of your time fixing code you've already written.
      Same goes for programmers, if you're a slouch just make everything you write unreadable to anyone else, don't document, save time and look good. Then in a few years start pushing your weight around and slow down, boss couldn't fire you if he wanted to.
      Security issues?
      Do it quick and wrong to start with, get hacked later (The current problem with Chinese hackers in american systems does well to make my point here, also lulzsec who turned out to be relatively unskilled) I've worked at some large businesses with super trivial security problems, I don't want to go into too much detail but told my boss, the CEO, and the CIO how our customer database and credit card information and pricing could get stolen with attacks I could expect a bright high schooler to be capable of, I was just the paranoid guy. It wasn't like we hadn't been hacked ever either. All of this could have been fixed with a go ahead from my boss (who had a problem with ideas that weren't his, normally it just meant helping him have an "idea" but if the details were beyond his technical scope, forget it) and a week of uninterrupted time to fix it all.

      Loss of confidentiality was completely acceptable, loss of integrity was almost completely acceptable, loss of availability was totally unacceptable particularly for exchange, web browsing, and the database. In that order, pretty much the same order problems would become apparent to upper management, the last only being understood because obviously losing all our records would be undeniably fatal to our enterprise. Though even then when we started running out of space and sent the bill through the company the CEO himself showed up at the door upset we were spending thousands for a few terrabytes of storage, a week to ship, and two days to get it installed when he could get 1tb for like $100 at the store and install it in seconds. I can understand the question, interesting answer actually, but for him to actually believe that we would be capable of being so blatantly lazy and wasteful kind of hurt, he really expected he was about to uncover a massive pile of waste and abuse (We had produced plenty of metrics indicating we operated at a fraction of the cost with a fraction of the people compared to other enterprises of our size or technological dependence, we could have even been much cheaper if it weren't for a handful of poor dec

    25. Re:Salaries by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To me the sad part is instead of the free market working as intended, which would be to raise salaries and lower worker abuse instead they'll just drag some poor bastards in from India that they can work like dogs and treat like dogshit.

      I have NEVER in my life seen ANY branch of a corporation treated with such hatred and contempt as I've seen IT treated. they act like they are nothing but glorified Geek Squad workers and give them less respect than a checkout girl at the local Wally World. EVERY need for resources is treated as a waste, EVERY need for action treated as an undue expense, EVERY suggestion treated like its coming from the mouth of a retard, I wouldn't take that fucking job again for all the tea in China!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    26. Re:Salaries by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The MBA classes do teach that the higher you pay a person the harder they will work (not the opposite)"

      Good story. It's only it fails to explain why -oh why, there's a "... Forty-nine percent of U.S. companies having a hard time filling what workforce management firm ManpowerGroup calls mission-critical positions within their organizations. IT staff" on a country that just a decade ago had a surplus on such roles.

      The MBA classes might teach whatever they (say) want. Quite a different issue is what their students learn... which basically ends up being "let's cry the government so we can get some more H1Bs on the cheap, get this quarter numbers fit and so get our bonuses and the hell with anything else".

    27. Re:Salaries by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I've seen so many companies not think about this fact, and only consider IT a cost center."

      Even with that only, IT would be quite well considered. After all, who would want to return to the productivity of a company-without-computers even for a second?

      But I'll tell you a secret. IT can do much more for the company if allowed. A glaring example: what does(did) Amazon? Amazon did sell books on-line. Now take your typical MBA: "a company must focus on its core competencies" I almost can hear. Well, Amazon's core competencies were certainly not maintaining hugh datacenters, so that task should have been subcontracted, shouldn't it, you out-of-the-mill Mr MBA?

      Well, Bezos had a different idea... and a uber-fast growing now multi-billion bussiness out of those datacenters... along with a buoyant business selling those (now not only) books on-line because of his top-notch datacenter management abilities.

      That's IT.

  2. Hard to find: For their price range by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Generally it's not the case they can't find them at all, they abound. They just can't find them at the substandard price and unreasonable work hours they used to. It's like the girl who gets hit on constantly by good but average guys and complains "why doesn't anyone hit on me?"

  3. Reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the article the 3 reasons why they can't find people:

    1.) lack of available applicants
    2.) applicants looking for more pay
    3.) lack of experience.

    I'm willing to bet that all 3 reasons are related to #2. Post a job listing online, looking for 20 yrs experience in Java and offer 40K/yr. Lets see anyone reasonable come try and fill that job post without asking for more money.

    1. Re:Reasons by crazyjj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lets see anyone reasonable come try and fill that job post without asking for more money.

      No they'll just go crying to their cronies in Congress to give them more H1B visas, saying there aren't any American workers out there. Then they'll hire some guy from India willing to work for next to nothing--who will produce shitty work in the long run, but hey it's all about the short term profits on paper anyway.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    2. Re:Reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This years bonus does not depend on next years performance...

  4. Second half of the phrase.... by wickerprints · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "IT positions some of the toughest jobs to fill in the US...because employers can't get enough cheap H1B foreign labor." This is not about finding Americans with enough technical expertise, of which there are plenty--it's about employers who aren't willing to pay for it, and want to hire cheap labor from India/China visa holders.

    1. Re:Second half of the phrase.... by blackbear · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it goes beyond that. I'm seeing H1B's getting the same or even beter rates on contracts than US citizens or even NAFTA visa holders. In spite of that, I've seen uniformly inferior work out of those H1Bs from India. It seems to be a cultural thing since I see good and even superior work from Americans, Canadians, and Wetern Europeans of Indian decent. Yet, the H1B's are getting the jobs. The customers (employees of the contract issuers) are complaining bitterly about the poor service, and nothing changes.

      I'm missing something here. If it's money, where are they cutting costs?

      I have noticed that well over half of the recruiting companies I've had dealings with are Indian owned. It also seems that ALL of the IBM contract positions go through these Indian owned companies.

  5. Two part problem by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. Americans bailed on the sector when the first big bump in 1998-2000. This left a gap that new trainees never really came in to fill.
    2. H1Bs go home. This means the insane over-recruitment of H1B employees had a cost at the end of their terms.
    3. There has been, up until 2008, and attitude in the U.S. that any college degree is good enough. My state only graduated 40,000 people from community colleges/trade schools this year. Everyone with higher aspirations just went to a 4 year school. To do less is to view oneself as a failure(and employers do too).
    4. Combine that with a culture with a slight distaste for mathematics and science and that's more than enough basic features to explain a discrepancy of this level.

  6. Basic economics by beamin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They just need to up their offer. Go invisible hand!

  7. There is a major shortage of recuiters and HR by johnb10001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    people that can write a job description and match job seekers to the jobs.

  8. I could see it by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To do well in IT you just have to have a certain problem solving ability. I don't think it is something that can be taught, or at least I can't tell you how to teach it. It isn't about knowing a lot about computers, it is about being able to process novel problems and find solutions to them, expediently preferably.

    That's what we look for when we hire students (I do IT work for a university). Finding students with experience is hard since, well, they are students of course they don't have experience and that aside the kind of things we do, almost nobody has experience with. That's ok, what we are really after is someone who is good with problem solving, particularly the kind of problem solving you need for computers.

    I've encountered more than a few people who are not very qualified/competent in IT. We've hired a few people since I've worked here and I've sat on their hiring board (the IT manager, my boss, usually has 4 other technical people with him on the board for interviews). The only people in interviews already made it past HR's resume filtering, and then were the best resume's from the bunch we got. Still, many have been totally unqualified and it becomes readily apparent in the interview process.

  9. No, really? by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As someone who recently sought to fill one of those openings, I have some advice for companies looking to hire: Let your existing IT people write the job listing. A disturbing number of the listings I came across were ridiculous.

    5 years experience required, for an entry-level position at $25,000 salary with weekends on-call? Nope. I might be unemployed, but I don't want to lose money on a job.

    Looking for someone A+-certified with mainframe maintenance and 15 years of Java programming experience? I'm close to qualified, but now I'm scared.

    Five programming tests and two phone interviews, and the face-to-face interviewer doesn't even get my name even close to right? I don't think the epitome of "faceless corporation" is the right fit...

    Look, I understand that there are lots of IT folks out of work, and you think that if you ask for the world, you'll get it from them. You might meet some success, but is stripping your employees of dignity really the right way to get a productive workforce?

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  10. Bullshit by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is the same whining we hear year after year. It's been going on since at least the early 90s, if not earlier. With few exceptions, there are people out there willing to fill these jobs but employers are unwilling to hire them because (jumping on the bandwagon here) they don't want to pay these technical people what they are worth and will not accept anyone who does not meet the exact, cross the T, dot the I experience they think they want.

    Employers have essentially pawned off all training on schools, completely unwilling to offer even the barest training to bring people up to speed. They now expect you to know the intricate details of their organization even though you have never worked for them before.

    Employers have brought this upon themselves and are now acting like spoiled 2 year olds, stomping their feet and holding their breath until they get their way.

    You want to know how to fill these positions? REDUCE the number of H1B visas and force employers to hire those unemployed IT folks who have applied for these positions but were rejected because they didn't fit the bill 100%.

    When I see the same job postings from the same employers month after month, entry to mid-level jobs, not the high-end, ultra technical positions which legitimately could have a shortage of workers, there are only two conclusions to reach: either no one is applying for the positions (for whatever reason), or employers are rejecting everyone because their standards are too high (and their heads are too high up their asses to figure it out).

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  11. Bullshit! by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that all these employers are looking for $10,000 Ferraris and bitching because they can't fill the niche. That way they can go out and cry to the Labor Department for an H1-B so they can get somebody on the cheap.

    It's not that the IT folks are asking for big money, but a decent living wage and employers are tempted with the H1-B rules to go out and leverage the crap out of them. Also there is a trend, in general, to have requirements so specific that the HR folks or the dreaded Taleo bullshit will filter out candidates who meet 70 to 80 percent of the requirements. I realize that's the situation we've been in for years but for all these employers who are crying I say that there are people out there who can work for them if 1) They're willing to pay at least the market rate for some of these positions rather than trying to drive the prices into the dirt and 2) Taking a look at their requirements and matching their candidates objectively, not allowing some fucking acronym matcher determine if a person is suitable or not for a job. Yeah, I know
    maybe that's too much to ask but considering that the information is coming from an HR temp staffing firm, which is another big, big problem with the IT industry but that's another kettle of fish.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  12. Companies are bad at hiring by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Companies (and HR departments in particular) are bad at hiring someone to grow into a job. They want someone who is in the top 20% of their profession and can do the entire job starting right away, but then they base their pay scales on the 50th percentile.

    Headhunters also do a bad job, at a high price.

    If there were people who could actually be trusted to do a good job at filling positions, lots of people would benefit.

  13. I disagree with that. by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've found that the ability to talk to non-technical people is more important to most hiring managers simply because it's a lot easier to train someone to be technical than it is to train them to work with people.

    I disagree with that.

    I think it is easier for the hiring managers to evaluate "interpersonal skills" than it is for them to evaluate "technical skills". And since it is easier for them, they value those skills more.

    http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/

    http://thedailywtf.com/

  14. 3 reasons by jbolden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The original article listed the 3 reasons the slots were hard to fill, "including lack of available applicants, applicants looking for more pay and lack of experience"

    So in other words employers who don't recruit, don't pay much and aren't willing to train are having trouble. Well good.

  15. Re:more like trouble finding staff at their price. by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Again, when you can buy your own laws the market is warped. This is what is happening.

    There is plenty of talent and plenty of people if you just follow the rules like you did in the good ol' days. This is one of those situations where the good old days were ACTUALLY good. Businesses had to compete for skills and didn't go crying to their favorite senator with money in hand when the market didn't go their way.

  16. You pay slave wages, you get slave labour. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While you MIGHT get extremely lucky and find one of the few techs who (for whatever reason) needs a job at any salary while having all those skills ...

    You'll pretty much end up with two situations:

    1. That person will be gone as soon as they find a better paying job. And you will have to start over again.

    2. That person really does not have those skills and is willing to learn them "on the job" while making all the mistakes a novice would make. And then leaves to find a better paying job.

    Either way, you pay slave wages, you get slave labour.

  17. Re:I think we all know how to solve this problem.. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am a sysadmin and I get contract to hire stuff all the time. Problem is I am currently full time employed....no contract and I have full benefits. Now TELL me why I want to leave for your pathetic 2 year contract?

    Offer me:

    1. More than I make now.
    2. Permanent...with bennies.
    3. Better working conditions (competent project management and not constantly being asked to perform a miracle in a week).

    Then....ONLY then will I consider even applying for the position.

    Another mistake they make is asking for God like qualities in a technical position. Qualities like:

    1. 10 years experience in a tech that has only existed for 5.
    2. 365/7/24 On call (Bullshit)
    3. That you can be a DBA, Sysadmin, Project Manager and chief cook and bottle washer.

    I've seen that in MANY postings and it's impossible to fill because they ask the world and expect to pay for the city. That doesn't jibe.

    --

    Gorkman

  18. Re:I think we all know how to solve this problem.. by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's your standard reply? I like $400/hour, 4 hour minimum + expenses, but that might be too low for you.

    My dad worked for the government for years. One of his buddies was talking to a recruiter, when the recruiter asked, "What will it take for you to come work for us." The guy answered something like 3x his current salary. Later the guy came back with "How about 2.8x salary?". He took the job.

    Always have an absurdly high number available. If the fish bite, reel them in.

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
  19. Re:Perspective from someone who is hiring... by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And what I've strongly suspected is that the good candidates, the ones you'd want to hire, get screened out in HR because they don't have that 20-page resume listing every skill under the sun and so don't get through the keyword filtering HR uses on resumes. I've sometimes wondered how much difference it'd make if HR was told "Don't screen. Send every resume down to the engineers and let them tell you which ones they want phone interviews for.". Then set aside the afternoon one day for a couple of the guys to just do a quick sort of the resumes into "OMGgethiminherenow!", "looks good" and "rubbish".

  20. That fact that you say you need someone. by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Something makes you think I'm not?

    Yeah. The fact that you're here claiming that you cannot fill that position.

    Knock off the cutesy, attempted implication but avoiding directly saying it, bullshit. Either you have an opening for X at $Y or you do not.

    The individual skills you're looking for are not uncommon. You can probably find someone with 2 of the 3 easily. And fairly inexpensively.

    But getting all 3 of the 3?
    Those people probably already have jobs doing something similar to what you're pushing and you'd have to hire them away from those jobs.

    So either you aren't offering them enough or there is something about the job or company that is scaring away the people with the experience you are looking for.

    And even experienced people who don't trust the situation can be hired if you're willing to pay enough up front.