Slashdot Mirror
Why Bad Jobs (or No Jobs) Happen To Good Workers
sean_nestor writes "Back in October, an article appeared in The Wall Street Journal with the headline 'Why Companies Aren't Getting the Employees They Need.' It noted that even with millions of highly educated and highly trained workers sidelined by the worst economic downturn in three generations, companies were reporting shortages of skilled workers. Companies typically blame schools, for not providing the right training; the government, for not letting in enough skilled immigrants; and workers themselves, who all too often turn down good jobs at good wages. The author of the article, an expert on employment and management issues, concluded that although employers are in almost complete agreement about the skills gap, there was no actual evidence of it. Instead, he said, 'The real culprits are the employers themselves.'" The linked article is an interview with Peter Cappelli, author of the WSJ piece, who has recently published a book on the alleged skills gap.
Actually I'm cancelling an upvote to reply.
In the UK, developers pay has frozen, if not reduced slightly over the past 12 years. I can't tell what it is in other sectors, but it's not a good thing.
Unfortunately most companies here go through (a handful of) employment agencies, and they're making a packet.
Sorry, but I've been on unemployment from time to time while working my ass off to find a new job. I have yet to see an unemployment check that came within a 1/4 of what most of the people reading Slashdot get paid. That also goes for most "middle" class jobs. You get laid-off from Wendy's then you might sit around on your ass, otherwise, you're going to be eating into your savings and trying like heck to find your next job before you lose the house/car/wife.
Citation needed.
Up here in Canada, employment insurance currently maxes out at $485 per week. That's taxed, of course, so what you actually get comes out to something slightly over $1600/mo.
If you live in the middle of nowhere and own your property, that might possibly be comfortable. Maybe. For some definition of comfortable. $DEITY help you if you live in an urban area though, and you rent or have a mortgage, or have dependents.
When your a corporate CEO billionaire and need to lay off people in order to buy your own friggin hawaiian island and then come back and bitch and whine that you can't find "talented people" something is fishy.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Like in Florida, where 1200 dollars a month is the maximum, even if you live in a high cost area like Miami. That 1200 a month was half of my cost for my house and utilities. Let's not even add in food, gas, insurance, internet access, cell phone - any of those things that you need to get a job - and the 1200 a month that I got for holding jobs since I was 14 didn't go far. I usually find that those that say "... unemployment benefits, both the size and duration, are a better option than a good job at a good wage." have never tried to live on such.
How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?
Yeah, no kidding. I'm Canadian, so add a dash of salt.
EI is 55% of your earnings, and tops out at $438 a week, then you get taxed on that, and it works out to a little over $800 every two weeks.
I make more than double that. EI doesn't pay the bills -- it doesn't even cover my mortgage.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
I did not say that i know everything, i said that my wide skill set allows me pretty fast to enter in any area, and actually not only to do the job, but to do it right, and to avoid most of the traps that some bright college grad would not miss to fall into.
it is simple economics. In my (california) company, the big boss (ceo) simply states "the economy is tight, so you need to find someone desperate for a job." We see all types of SKILLED and HIREABLE people all the time, and I would love to hire ANY ONE OF THEM. Then they see our benes and salary (this is abridged, obviously, for Slashdot):
Mid-level to Senior engineer/tech with at least 3 years microsoft server 2008 admin, 3 years vmware (vsp5 + proven record of HA cluster design), Exchange 200x -> 2010 upgrade experience (lead), at least CCNA, A+, copper and fiber cabling skills (pulls, terms, xc), documented senior WAN design expierience (MPLS, FR, PRI, ATM), documented LAN design, expertise in wireless design and installation, based in so.cal but be available for travel from the oregon border to western AZ w/1 day notice, rotating 24x7 on call, required to work 30% of weekends and expected to work after-hours when needed. 80% @ customer site. No comp time. 7 days vacation AFTER 1 year (vacation is not accrued but lump-sum'd at the end of each working year), paid legal holidays, no bonus, no spiffs, no retirement plan, employer paid PPO. Average work week is 50-60hrs. Salary: $50k/year
Candidates see the bene package and walk. Apparently they are not desperate enough.
The CEO thinks that $50k/year for the above is HIGH. So we get to complain "we can't find anyone to work for us," blame it on the economy, and another company gets added to the 'we can't find skilled employees to fill our positions. And I wind up trolling Craigslist for bottom-feeders with fake resumes.
I agree. One way to get a jump start on this is to become either a freelance W-2 contractor (or 1099 - but W-2 is easier to find due to liability concerns for subcontracting) and snag one or two good clients that you can work for remotely. I do hospital systems integration and have an elderly parent to care for (lives 10 minutes away). Working remote offers me the ability to still deliver excellent service at any hour, and not have to live out of a suitcase.
The trouble is, a lot of dinosaurs still inhabit middle management. They feel that if they can't see you warming a chair in a cube-farm, you're not working. Sadly they fear things like webcams and Skype. Even sadder, most times I usually got more work done in those situations when I could work from the hotel room later at night with fewer interruptions.
It also helps that I am in a niche market of healthcare where a lot of "whiz-bang kids" and all users of the new flavors-of-the-day high tech buzzword compliant crap think EDI and medical interfacing is "boring" - but I work to live, not the other way around and make damn good money at it. I'm also weird in that I actually enjoy it.
For those potential clients sitting on a fence about it, I offer them one free interface remotely. If they don't like my work, I walk away. Every time I explain that their dollars are better spent toward actual deliverables instead of paying travel, room and board for a bunch of laptop carrying suit-monkeys they usually try me out and keep using me.
And for those people saying, "well they can just offshore you", they're right. However, please keep in mind that I do good work and can communicate effectively with the client. I am affable, pleasant, and deliver what I say. I also have worked in healthcare and hospitals for 20+ years and KNOW their business intimately. Workers in India with really thick accents named "Sarah" and "Bob" can only compete with me on money. In healthcare, thankfully, accuracy, depth of knowledge of both the business and workflow, and the ability to work with a team means as much if not more than money. My repeat business is more than I can usually take on comfortably.
Working from home just takes a willingness to be available MORE often until the manager is comfortable. Let me say this - as remote technologies improve to enable extended work distances, clients embrace the use of Skype, webcams and WebEx, and more of these 50's style babysitting managerial-goons die off and retire, more opportunities to work remotely will appear. The best advice I can give really has nothing to do with working remotely - save money for the times you don't have work and for the love of all that is Holy - LIVE BELOW YOUR MEANS!
Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
Summarising from TFA:
Employers want people who already have skills. Which almost certainly means people who are already in work. Because if you have been out of work for any significant time, you are "behind the curve". Therefore, employers want to poach.
But employers want to pay "the market rate". But everybody is already paying "the market rate" - those who were not have lost the employees you want to poach already. So most of the people they might consider are already employed at the market rate. The only people with skills and available are those whose companies are, at this moment, downsizing. But even downsizers hang on to the best, so few of the best come onto the market.
So employers must do one of two things:
1. Pay more.
2. Train more.
Both cost, but 1 costs for ever, while 2 costs for the few months it takes to get a new employee up to speed on a new skill. Employers need to widen their specifications and take on people who, while generally bright, capable, and knowledgeable in the field, do not necessarily have the exact skills needed for the job today.
Which, in turn, means taking less of a "Just In Time" attitude to hiring. Good workers are not items you can order off the shelf, along with a desk, a chair, and a PC.
Particularly, in the software field, stop specifying X years of a particular language and in-depth knowledge of four specific tools. Look instead for a good record of bringing in projects on time with few bugs. Projects have to be in the same general field, but the specifics are irrelevant. The right person will be trained up on your tools in tree to six months, when s/he will have cost you less than you paid the recruiter, and will have don at least something to earn that on the way,
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
I'd put some blame on the ease of applications too. It used to take a good twenty minutes or so to write a job application. Now, it's one click to send a form-email. Potential employees end up applying for jobs they haven't a hope at getting 'just in case' and employers have to spend time sorting through a mountain of chaff in the hunt for an application worth interviewing.
The article talks about this. The actual skills gap is caused by employers resorting to algorithms to filter applications. Because the algorithms in common use are too specific, they eliminate all candidates for the position.
The main myth of the skills gap is that people are turning down positions. What is frequently happening is that they aren't even getting through the screening applications. One of the key points is that the employer in the screening application has a maximum salary; if everyone puts down a desired salary above this number, then it appears that there are no qualified applicants.
He effected a bored affect.
Leave the valley. Seriously. You will make a bit less money elsewhere, but the cost of living will be much, much lower, which is a net gain. You'll also have recruiters banging down your door trying to get you to interview. You might not have the chance to work at the next hot Silicon Valley startup, but I'm guessing that at over 50, that's probably not too high on your priority list.
it would be very hard for a person like me to leave silicon valley. as a hardcore hardware geek, this is one of the few places on the planet to be. not kidding; some people want to be by beaches (I can take those or leave them) - but I really enjoy being near places that have surplus hardware gear and parts. its what I'm about and its paradise, in a way, for geeks like me.
I'll be honest that the weather is also a huge draw. having grown up in the boston area, I know what east coast cold is like and its worth money just to *avoid* cold climates. I know, its a wimpish excuse but having lived in the bay area and experienced its climate, it would be a huge step down to leave it. its really something that makes life *that* much more pleasant. its expensive here but not without cause; the paradise tax really is worth it, just for the climate, alone.
at some point, though, I may be forced to leave. it will be very sad as it will be me giving up, essentially. I do not want to move and shouldn't have to. it also sounds like a bad way to start out, having to move to some place just because there were no offers in your desired or chosen place.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
there are jobs to be had..plenty of them.
Except there aren't, that's the problem. There are four times as many unemployed people as there are jobs, so odds are you have to be in the top 25% of your field just to qualify for the lowest possible wage.
In fact, more often than not, you have to have a job already in order to get a job.
Employers broke the contract first.
As someone else said, the very idea that a subset of the employees are the only ones who really matter is a characteristic of the post-loyalty environment.
A more accurate description of the "old way" is that employers used to provide training and advancement opportunities. Employees would take the training and get rewarded with advancement, or not and not get rewarded.
The new way is to provide neither training nor advancement. Employees must train on their own time at their own expense to avoid getting laid off, and must change jobs if they want to actually advance their careers.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.