Slashdot Mirror


Spain Runs Out of Workers With Almost 5 Million Unemployed (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader shares a Bloomberg report:Spanish headhunter Samuel Pimentel just can't find the candidates. After a frustrating search for specialist consultants for a client, he's given up and is casting his net elsewhere. "We were looking for people for two months," Pimentel, a partner at Ackermann Beaumont Group for Spain and Latin America, said in a telephone interview. "We managed to find one in Spain. We turned to Argentina for others." Pimentel's experience reflects a bizarre feature of the Spanish labor market that is hampering the country's efforts to repair the damage from the economic crisis. Even with close to 5 million people out of work, the next prime minister will face labor shortages with employers struggle to find the staff they need. "It's a paradox," said Valentin Bote, head of research in Spain at Randstad, a recruitment agency. "The unemployment rate is too high. Yet we're seeing some tension in the labor market because unemployed people don't have the skills employers demand."

21 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. Or they offer too little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Why can't we find workers that will work for peanuts? They're all unemployed, they should be happy with anything!"

    1. Re:Or they offer too little by fibonacci8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or my favorite aspect of the "paradox", when employers demand a 4 year degree, or 5 years equivalent experience with technology that has existed for 2 years. Then the problem isn't the workforce, it's the expectation of far more than the required skill set to perform a job.

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    2. Re:Or they offer too little by layabout · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sounds like you are acknowledging that the welfare state causes unemployment.

      only in that is allows workers to say no to unreasonable employer demands.

    3. Re:Or they offer too little by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They don't want to pay for training either. Used to be many people were taught their trade by their employer, but now they expect the cost to be covered by the government and the employee.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Or they offer too little by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful
      That's due to an often-unnoticed failure mode of HR. There are two possible hiring candidates (qualified, unqualified) and two possible HR actions (hire, don't hire). This creates four possible outcomes:

      Visible outcomes:
      • Hire a qualified candidate. Everything is good here. HR gets commended for a job well done. Company gets a good employee.
      • Hire an unqualified candidate. Company gets a bad employee. HR gets yelled or fired for failing to do their job.

      Invisible outcomes:

      • Don't hire an unqualified candidate. HR did their job here, but company doesn't know it.
      • Don't hire a qualified candidate. HR failed at their job here, but company doesn't know it.

      The only way to see the invisible outcomes is to test HR by sending in a few eminently qualified resumes and fake (but talented) people to do interviews. Almost nobody does this, so HR lives in a bubble where only the visible outcomes matter. That means their strategy is to eliminate unqualified candidates at all costs, even if it means you also eliminate some qualified candidates. So if HR is supposed to fill a job which requires 2 years experience in a new technology, play it safe and ask for 5 years experience in that tech in the job listing. It doesn't matter that their shoddy listing eliminates all honest applicants competent in the technology. As long as the dishonest applicant they eventually hire is also competent in the technology, HR can only be commended.

    5. Re:Or they offer too little by nctritech · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This discussion reminded me of this now nine-year-old video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... "Immigration attorneys from Cohen & Grigsby explains how they assist employers in running classified ads with the goal of NOT finding any qualified applicants, and the steps they go through to disqualify even the most qualified Americans in order to secure green cards for H-1b workers."

  2. his policy of driving down wages by turkeydance · · Score: 5, Informative

    quote from article

  3. You made your bed. by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Informative

    What happens when employers stop re-training employees and start shitcanning anyone as soon as possible, relying on obtaining trained people from the rest of the economy when people are needed again? That's right: trained people are quickly drained from the economy leaving only the trained who command very high wages and the untrained, who cannot be employed.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  4. Re:Wrong Problem by layabout · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No loyalty to the hands that taught you how to fish.

    companies get as much loyalty as they give.

  5. Lack of Planning by Blue+Stone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The idea that businesses should actually train the workforce that they need, such as with apprenticeships, sponsoring employees in education on the job, or whatever, seems to be lost on Spanish businesses, I guess?

    "We thought there'd just be the employees we needed out there somewhere. We didn't think we'd have to take responsibility for any of it!" seems to be their take.

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    1. Re:Lack of Planning by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The idea that businesses should actually train the workforce that they need, such as with apprenticeships, sponsoring employees in education on the job, or whatever, seems to be lost on Spanish businesses, I guess?

      I think we're going to see more and more of that tension in a lot of places. The reality in the world is that for most jobs, "on the job education" is the most effective. We've created a system that tells young people to go to college, but traditional universities were never really designed for job training. That happens at technical schools. At a higher level where theory is required in addition to practice, it can happen at a "professional school," like med school, which tends to combine some theoretical coursework with apprenticeships (i.e., clinical training, often at a teaching hospital).

      We're seeing a greater and greater problem for college graduates finding jobs, because they don't have practical skills that one will generally learn on the job over the course of several months or a few years. And it's also very inefficient because the theoretical material students learn in a college classroom is often forgotten quickly without practical reinforcement, forcing graduates to relearn the material needed on a daily basis when they finally find a job (rather than integrating it into more permanent and practical knowledge as they go). College was designed to be "higher education," not job training -- it was meant to expose students to a wide variety of ideas and disciplines, not teach only the specific skills for a job. It makes no sense to segregate theoretical and practical training if you actually want students to learn skills for a job.

      If employers really wanted better (and more loyal) workers, they should stop just requiring a degree before getting a job and instead help train workers on the job, perhaps partnering with a higher-ed program to provide a bit of theoretical instruction as necessary to complement the work.

      Why aren't they doing this?....

      "We thought there'd just be the employees we needed out there somewhere. We didn't think we'd have to take responsibility for any of it!" seems to be their take.

      Sort of. But I suspect this is primarily being driven by a desire to have lower-cost employees. A few decades ago, companies were mostly limited to whomever they could find locally. It was really expensive to look beyond the local labor market, let alone internationally, so it was mostly done only for major jobs in the company.

      Nowadays, it's so much easier and faster to just find someone on the other side of the planet who has most of the skills already and is willing to work for a fraction of the cost of a local worker.

  6. Re:internal training by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's several EU countries that have young adult unemployment rates at, near or above 50% now. Seems to me that there's a more serious problem then simply that. Either they don't want to hire people and train them for the jobs, they have requirements for jobs that are stupid or they're shitcanning people who could have been retrained and kept within the company.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  7. Proof the EU is Working by Person147 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Well it is quite likely that the ones with the required skills have already been snapped up by companies from other parts of the EU that tend to have more contracts. A two month contract is hardly a basis for a reliable income. Move to somewhere like Berlin or London and there will be far more opportunities. Working in FinTech in London I find all the time that the people are am working with are from all across the EU as there are so many more possibilities here in London. This empties the talent pool from the source countries. I hear this all the time from Lithuanians in particular.

    London is far wealthier than the rest of the UK as all the skilled people move here from all over the country. Just the same happening but at an international level.

    1. Re:Proof the EU is Working by cardpuncher · · Score: 4, Insightful

      London is far wealthier than the rest of the UK as all the skilled people move here from all over the country

      This is, in essence, why the rest of the UK voted to leave the EU and take London down with it. The EU counterweight to the free movement of people and capital is regional development which is supposed to have a redistributive effect and even out the gains and losses. I'm afraid the hollowing-out of talent from many regions and countries of the EU is proof precisesly that the EU is not working as intended.

    2. Re:Proof the EU is Working by ffkom · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You forgot to mention the billions of Euro that the EU spends on aid payments to support specifically the structurally weak areas of Europe - including Spain.

      If Spain wasn't in the EU, their clever youth would still leave the country for a better career abroad - but Spain wouldn't get anything back.

      Or do you think that in a nationalist euphoria, spanish youngsters would suddenly decide to stay in their sucking local job market if Spain left the EU?

      BTW: A colleague of mine relocated from Germany to Spain (for the warmer weather). He still works for the same German company - just remotely. So he at least supports the spanish economy by buying stuff where he now lives. If Spain wasn't in the EU, such a relocation might have been too cumbersome to do it just for the sake of warmer weather.

  8. Re:internal training by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or maybe they have laws that once you hire someone you're stuck with them for years. Hence nobody hires unless they know the person is already skilled.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  9. Re:Abusive government by Zumbs · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The summary suggests that the Spanish labor market is not raising wages to draw the migrant workers back home, but rather importing workers from Argentina to keep wages low. Given the high unemployment in Spain, it also puzzles me why the Spanish government and employers association are not actively providing facilities to educate unemployed workers to take the vacant positions. Or look for skilled Syrian workers, but that is another discussion.

    --
    The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
  10. Re:Abusive government by geoskd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's the average pay for American engineers in fantasy land?

    Same as it was ten years ago, and only marginally higher than it was 20 years ago.

    When I graduated in '01, the median starting pay in my field was $65k, and average pay was $91k. Today, the median starting pay is $70k, and average pay is $93k. That is an average annual increase in starting pay of 0.45% per year. The increase in average pay across the whole field has only increased by 0.133% per year. Meanwhile, unemployment in my field is pretty close to zero. There are almost no qualified applicants out of the hundreds of resumes we receive for any given opening. In spite of the incredibly low unemployment, there has been no increase in salaries, due to several factors. First, employers know that their employees will not be able to get significantly better elsewhere, so they do not offer any better than they have to. Second, filling open positions is typically done by job postings, and referrals, not by "poaching". What this means is that the company has to wait longer to find a qualified applicant, but they don't have to pay the premium in cost that is associated with poaching employees (10-20% higher salary than the poached employees current salary). It is the effect of poaching that significantly drives salary increases. When companies have to resort to poaching to achieve staffing levels, industry salaries rise fast. That is why the anti-poaching agreements between silicon valley companies should have been punished by virtue of an automatic 15% raise for all of their current employees. This would have been sufficient punishment to make the companies rethink that policy, and also would have effectively undid the damage that had been caused by the anti-poaching in the first place.

    The last thing that needs to be noted is that in general, people who are capable of performing high skilled labor are not the simple result of "training". You can't take just any high school graduate, and through the magic of training, turn them into a skilled worker. There is a percentage of the population that can never be trained to handle a particular job. The higher the skill level, the larger the percentage. What we are seeing in Spain is the natural progression of this process. Most of those 5 million unemployed people simply cant handle the work that needs to be done. Some small percentage of them could probably handle it if given the opportunity, but the majority of them are effectively untrainable to fit the needs of the work that is in demand.

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  11. Re:Abusive government by geoskd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it also puzzles me why the Spanish government and employers association are not actively providing facilities to educate unemployed workers to take the vacant positions.

    Because you don't train someone, who has been manufacturing doorknobs for the last 20 years, to now be an electrical engineer. The majority of these unemployed people are incapable of developing the skillset necessary to handle the work that is available. Given the extremely high payscales listed in TFA, if the unemployed people were capable of learning it at all, they would have already availed themselves of the higher education system to achieve those degrees.

    There is a fallacy in this world that anyone can be anything they want. The sad reality is that most people simply don't have the basic talent to become a rocket scientist. Pretending that we can fill an urgent need for rocket scientists by retraining a bunch of gas station attendants is just stupid.

    Its time the world faces the reality that there is already an entire class of people who have such a low value to society that the only reason they can survive is because governments artificially maintain minimum wages. Every advance in technology renders an ever larger subset of the population into this class. It is time that humanity stops and decides what the future of the race is going to look like, because if we don't, then the matter will decide itself, and will do so the way it always has: through warfare.

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  12. Re:Abusive government by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The last thing that needs to be noted is that in general, people who are capable of performing high skilled labor are not the simple result of "training". You can't take just any high school graduate, and through the magic of training, turn them into a skilled worker. There is a percentage of the population that can never be trained to handle a particular job. The higher the skill level, the larger the percentage. What we are seeing in Spain is the natural progression of this process. Most of those 5 million unemployed people simply cant handle the work that needs to be done. Some small percentage of them could probably handle it if given the opportunity, but the majority of them are effectively untrainable to fit the needs of the work that is in demand.

    Absolutely. Not everyone is capable of doing every job, no matter how much training you give them. Even of those who can be trained, some are going to be a lot better than others. This has a lot of consequences, because the low-skilled but high-paying jobs of the old days are vanishing at an increasing rate, and they're not coming back. When we put 3 million professional truck/etc drivers out of work, we can't just stick them all in a web development class and call it even. At some point - maybe not today, but eventually the day will come, where we have to entirely rethink our employment paradigm, institute a minimum basic income or the like, and accept that not everyone will be directly employed the way they used to be.

  13. Being "that guy" by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So yeah, if you ever sit on this side of the table you'll discover there are a lot of folks who aren't qualified to do the work they seek.

    I've sat there. Way back when, I was on the interviewee side of the table, generally looking for either an EE or programmer job (or both.) I wasn't hugely impressed with most interviews, either. Later, having gone out on my own, I did the interviews myself, and later yet, after my companies had grown large enough, supervised those who did the interviews. My experience has been that if the job is specified well enough, and you don't suffer from application of non-skill-based criteria such as age, weight, credit report, arrest records, sex, degrees and certifications, and you don't proffer an abusive workplace or shitty remuneration, then there's no problem whatsoever hiring qualified people with sufficient or superior skill sets and quite easily recognized ability to learn. I've never, ever hired anyone who couldn't / didn't do the job they were hired for. Sure, yes, lots of people interviewed who weren't qualified by skill set. None were ever hired for something they weren't capable of either doing or learning. This was neither unexpected or a significant burden. It was a very rare unqualified or over-the-top abrasive person who didn't reveal their lack of suitability in just a few minutes of questioning. Not one made it to a job offer. Not in 30 years.

    In software, my companies have done image and signal processing, both hardware and software. We put the very first morphing software for a desktop PC on the market, and our image processing / special effects software was used in myriad movies and television shows. We also did artificial life software, paint software, cross-assemblers, microprocessor emulators, and some of the earliest object-oriented CAD systems, among other things. We did absolutely top-notch technical support, second to none -- that's the thing I remain proudest of to this day. In hardware, we designed and manufactured graphics engines / accelerators; fax systems; status display systems; software oscilloscopes, FSK modems that were 100% DSP before DSP was a term on anyone's tongue; blitters; etc.

    As to security clearances, I can't say. If you want to hurdle that particular wall, then you've bought into whatever requirements they lay on you from above, and yeah, I could see where, especially today, you'd have trouble. Fortunately, I'm mostly retired now, writing free software and only taking the occasional really interesting consulting job for myself, and I won't ever have to put up with that particular brand of oversight. Not that I ever did.

    WRT criminal records, some of my best employees were those whom others had simply refused to hire for that very reason. None ever did my operations any harm at all, and a few were real stars.

    I can't say I have any sympathy for operations that impose non-skill set criteria on their hires. No matter what size. it's a choice. Not an imperative. You make the choice, okay, certainly you can do that, but I am utterly deaf to your complaints about the consequences to you -- my sympathies lie entirely with the people who remain unemployed in the face of job opportunities they could handle perfectly well.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.