Sorry, but I will bet that you are not a demographer. It's correct that we're at the "apex" (more realistically, the bottom of the baby bust trough) and that starting now the numbers of graduates will start to rise--very, very slowly. However, since age of graduation is now up around 23-24, the pool of available young workers is still shrinking and is expected to continue to shrink for some time to come. Skeptical? Check out the real demographers on this topic, at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The shrinkage in the pool of available young workers is highlighted as one of the key points in trends for the brand new edition of the U.S. Occupational Outlook Handbook, which says that the trend is in place now and will continue to be in effect for at least the next five years.
Well, not quite. Bob Rivers, a professional curmudgeon of the high tech scene for at least the last 20 years, says the same thing, but Bob is not an economist. Problem is that the economic models do not operate flawlessless and do not work in a vacuum. There is a Learned Literature on this topic, cited in the IT workforce reports. The bottom line is that labor shortages ARE conceded to be possible by serious labor economists, especially "spot" shortages in very specific skills. So it just ain't workable to just write off the notion of possible shortages as economically illogical. You gotta do better than that to get industry or the political authorities to pay any attention.
Yup. It is indeed ambiguous and us bean counters do not really have the ability to zone in on the more detailed specialties (and that is what really counts). FYE (For yer edification) the IT Workforce Project used simple Census and BLS classifications. We figured that "IT Worker" included people with either degrees or work experience in any branch of computer science, systems analysis, or computer engineering. We also included people counted as programmers, although the federal data doesn't include that category with professional jobs. We did NOT include IT managers or lots of other closely related job or degree titles (like info science). So the bean-counting data is probably too broad, but it's a whole lot better than nothing. The industry shortage claims are based on exactly the same kinds of degree and job titles, so at least the pro and con arguments are consistently defined.
The point is well taken but it IS possible to point to one big difference: IT is at the cutting edge of the new economy and there is incredible investor interest in it. That fuels all these risky startups and helps create the insatiable lust for what one manager who's written to me calls "Java Gods." He says "If you were to tell me that there was a large contingent of JAVA, PHP, EJB, XML, DHTML and the like in the marketplace, I would literally fly to your location with employment offers and set up a table on the street corner."
Re:The TOP TEN (serious) reasons why a shortage cl
on
The IT Labor Shortage
·
· Score: 1
Very good comments. I especially like No. 5. Perspective's needed, though. Hey, it is a huge industry and there are a whole lot of folks out there who are reasonably satisfied. IT is not a field where any one description fits everybody. It's too big and too diverse for one-size-fits-all characterizations to work (and that, in turn, is a good reason to be very careful about reading too much into my take on the career situation in the DDJ piece or the original IT Workforce projects). The practice of not counting people who have gotten ANY kind of work as unemployed in their actual main field did NOT originate with the Clinton administration. Unemployment has been counted this way forever, mainly because the Powers That Be (and Republican pols in particular) are not willing to spend what it would take to do better. The U.S. statistical system has been poorly supported for 20 years and our intelligence shows it. Yeah, there are a LOT of people out there who are not counted as unemployed but probably ought to be at least flagged as underemployed, that is, like programmers who are working as clerks or worse because they can't find appropriate jobs. Some of those people have posted accounts of their situations here. Bob Rivers estimates that "true" unemployment for technical people is about 3.3 times the reported figures. For the benefit of anybody who's delved this far into all these comments, two more points. First, I think these comments are a gold mine for anybody interested in the career scene. Many of them are really good. Second, this whole issue is gonna come up before the Congress again this Spring. The focus will be on foreign temps but I think this just might be an opportunity to inject a push for a movement to get employers to get more serious about the need their people have to keep up their skills. As far as I can tell that is the most critical issue that might actually be able to be improved. The number one problem programmers face is the need to constantly keep up with emerging tools while still putting in long hours on current technology. If you agree, you ought to start thinking about ways to put pressures on your Congressperson, because deals are going to get cut with industry and better employer practices might be able to be traded for increased access to all those people from outside the USA.
I suspect ALL industries suck. Different ones just suck for different reasons. There are a bunch of ways to overcome this. All involve some luck but most of us can get lucky sooner or later, the trick is to recognize it and jump when opportunity knocks. First, in an industry with two or three million jobs there are some good situations. Second, people who are really good can go independent and be their own bosses. Hey, nobody said life was gonna be easy. Or if they did say that, they lied.
Re:How should one go about his education then?
on
The IT Labor Shortage
·
· Score: 1
Go to Georgia Tech. IIT is not in the same league.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but I will bet that you are not a demographer. It's correct that we're at the "apex" (more realistically, the bottom of the baby bust trough) and that starting now the numbers of graduates will start to rise--very, very slowly. However, since age of graduation is now up around 23-24, the pool of available young workers is still shrinking and is expected to continue to shrink for some time to come. Skeptical? Check out the real demographers on this topic, at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The shrinkage in the pool of available young workers is highlighted as one of the key points in trends for the brand new edition of the U.S. Occupational Outlook Handbook, which says that the trend is in place now and will continue to be in effect for at least the next five years.
Well, not quite. Bob Rivers, a professional curmudgeon of the high tech scene for at least the last 20 years, says the same thing, but Bob is not an economist. Problem is that the economic models do not operate flawlessless and do not work in a vacuum. There is a Learned Literature on this topic, cited in the IT workforce reports. The bottom line is that labor shortages ARE conceded to be possible by serious labor economists, especially "spot" shortages in very specific skills. So it just ain't workable to just write off the notion of possible shortages as economically illogical. You gotta do better than that to get industry or the political authorities to pay any attention.
Yup. It is indeed ambiguous and us bean counters do not really have the ability to zone in on the more detailed specialties (and that is what really counts). FYE (For yer edification) the IT Workforce Project used simple Census and BLS classifications. We figured that "IT Worker" included people with either degrees or work experience in any branch of computer science, systems analysis, or computer engineering. We also included people counted as programmers, although the federal data doesn't include that category with professional jobs. We did NOT include IT managers or lots of other closely related job or degree titles (like info science). So the bean-counting data is probably too broad, but it's a whole lot better than nothing. The industry shortage claims are based on exactly the same kinds of degree and job titles, so at least the pro and con arguments are consistently defined.
The point is well taken but it IS possible to point to one big difference: IT is at the cutting edge of the new economy and there is incredible investor interest in it. That fuels all these risky startups and helps create the insatiable lust for what one manager who's written to me calls "Java Gods." He says "If you were to tell me that there was a large contingent of JAVA, PHP, EJB, XML, DHTML and the like in the marketplace, I would literally fly to your location with employment offers and set up a table on the street corner."
Very good comments. I especially like No. 5. Perspective's needed, though. Hey, it is a huge industry and there are a whole lot of folks out there who are reasonably satisfied. IT is not a field where any one description fits everybody. It's too big and too diverse for one-size-fits-all characterizations to work (and that, in turn, is a good reason to be very careful about reading too much into my take on the career situation in the DDJ piece or the original IT Workforce projects). The practice of not counting people who have gotten ANY kind of work as unemployed in their actual main field did NOT originate with the Clinton administration. Unemployment has been counted this way forever, mainly because the Powers That Be (and Republican pols in particular) are not willing to spend what it would take to do better. The U.S. statistical system has been poorly supported for 20 years and our intelligence shows it. Yeah, there are a LOT of people out there who are not counted as unemployed but probably ought to be at least flagged as underemployed, that is, like programmers who are working as clerks or worse because they can't find appropriate jobs. Some of those people have posted accounts of their situations here. Bob Rivers estimates that "true" unemployment for technical people is about 3.3 times the reported figures. For the benefit of anybody who's delved this far into all these comments, two more points. First, I think these comments are a gold mine for anybody interested in the career scene. Many of them are really good. Second, this whole issue is gonna come up before the Congress again this Spring. The focus will be on foreign temps but I think this just might be an opportunity to inject a push for a movement to get employers to get more serious about the need their people have to keep up their skills. As far as I can tell that is the most critical issue that might actually be able to be improved. The number one problem programmers face is the need to constantly keep up with emerging tools while still putting in long hours on current technology. If you agree, you ought to start thinking about ways to put pressures on your Congressperson, because deals are going to get cut with industry and better employer practices might be able to be traded for increased access to all those people from outside the USA.
I suspect ALL industries suck. Different ones just suck for different reasons. There are a bunch of ways to overcome this. All involve some luck but most of us can get lucky sooner or later, the trick is to recognize it and jump when opportunity knocks. First, in an industry with two or three million jobs there are some good situations. Second, people who are really good can go independent and be their own bosses. Hey, nobody said life was gonna be easy. Or if they did say that, they lied.
Go to Georgia Tech. IIT is not in the same league.