?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
22 November 2011 @ 11:37 am
Notes from last night's IAAP meeting  
"There are plenty of jobs, just not enough people with the skills to fill those jobs."

[I'm not sure I buy that, given that I keep seeing news reports of "Company X is eliminating 10,000 jobs" or "Company Y is consolidating its operations and will lay off 250 workers", and given that every job is getting dozens if not scores if not hundreds of applicants.]

"Mature workers" face considerable difficulties getting hired: 40% of companies will not hire someone age 40 or older, 60% will not hire someone age 50 or older, and 80% will not hire someone age 60 or older.

However, both WalMart and CVS do hire mature workers; at WalMart, approximately 14% of the workforce is age 50 or more.

[They're probably working part-time at minimum wage with no benefits.]

Best things a mature worker can do are: keep skills current, perhaps by volunteering or signing up with temp agencies that offer training; expand job search by looking at more companies and different industries; or start own business.

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) covers anyone age 40 and up. Legal action is possible; however, only have 180 days to file with EEOC after the incident of discrimination.
 
 
 
Fat Fred the Otter and Skippy: iotterfatfred on November 22nd, 2011 04:47 pm (UTC)

I'll be 50 next month.
That is very frightening!
Jon Reidcrossfire on November 22nd, 2011 05:01 pm (UTC)
On average, the careers of males in my field peaks at 40. After that it's all downhill. Right now my skillset is the New Hotness and I hope to continue to ride that wave for another decade. If JavaScript wasn't so in demand right now, though, I'm sure I'd be feeling this.
Johnjohnpalmer on November 22nd, 2011 06:58 pm (UTC)
Herm. Let's suppose there *are* plenty of jobs but people don't have the skills for them.

Depending on what the speaker is trying to say, isn't that like "there's plenty of food; look at all that grass and hay! A cow would have a *feast*"?

I don't think that it's a correct statement, but even if it was, it strikes me as a meaningless one, or possibly a cruel one. "It's all *your* fault if you're hungry; you didn't bother to evolve to be able to eat grass!"

But I think it's more likely that people aren't spending much, meaning businesses are nervous about new investments (including new employees) because they don't know if they'll grow enough to absorb the new costs, and that there are therefore not "plenty of jobs". All the data points in that direction.
Bill the bold bosthoonwcg on November 22nd, 2011 07:56 pm (UTC)
Yeah, that looks about right. (Says the 57 year old Aerospace Engineering Manager...)
Syona aka the Silicon Shamansiliconshaman on November 22nd, 2011 08:31 pm (UTC)
"There are plenty of jobs, just not enough people with the skills to fill those jobs."

I thought that had been proven to be so much B.S ?! It's certainly not true over this side of the pond.... there just aren't enough jobs, period.
starcat_jewelstarcat_jewel on November 22nd, 2011 09:04 pm (UTC)
Can you suggest program items? How about having a dozen college-educated unemployed people of all ages come in and talk about their experiences with seeking employment? How many jobs have these educated, literate people applied for and been turned down in the last year?

That should at least take some of the steam out of the victim-bashing.
Janet Miles, CAP-OMjanetmiles on November 22nd, 2011 10:22 pm (UTC)
Can you suggest program items?

The programs are set a year at a time, so, no, not really.
Shadow/Brookekengr on November 22nd, 2011 10:16 pm (UTC)
The mere fact that the number of unemployed is something like *ten times* (or more) the number of job openings shoots that one in the foot.

So do the news reports of *huge* lines for semi-skilled jobs (hundreds of people applying for a dozen openings).

The "not enough people with the skills *may* be tru for a very limited subset of job openings. But even there, you tend to have that blasted "overqualified" filter messing up the equation.

I sometimes wonder what would happen if employers got hit with a "must accept first qualified applicant unless can show *cause* from them being a bad fit" type rule.

Yes, I can see all sorts of ways it'd break. But at least it'd break *differently* than the current mess.


The Djao'Mor'Terra Collectivefayanora on November 23rd, 2011 09:42 am (UTC)
"There are plenty of jobs, just not enough people with the skills to fill those jobs."

What a crock! There are at least 10 unemployed people for every available job!

[They're probably working part-time at minimum wage with no benefits.]

No doubt. Wal-Mart's only full-time jobs are management positions. I know, I used to work there.

The problem with anti-discrimination laws is enforcement. Most employers won't tell you why they didn't hire you, or won't tell you the real reason. And others are blatant about it. I once interviewed for a job where the guy asked me if I go to church. At the time, I didn't, so I said no. No surprise, I didn't get the job. (If asked now, I could say yes, as I go to a Unitarian Universalist church.)
Tom the Alien Cat: little green man felinetomtac on November 23rd, 2011 02:33 pm (UTC)
In the state where I used to live, a high ranking lawmaker stated that thought for the benefit of the newspapers, and it got a lot of coverage. "There aren't enough workers with the skills needed for those jobs, that's why we -have- to bring people in from other countries" or something like that.

At the time, we had a great networking group going, hundreds and hundreds of us meeting once a week, every Wednesday morning, desperately applying to job after job for which we were quite qualified.

We, as a group, all voters, invited this high ranking politico to come and give a talk at our networking meeting. We never heard from him.

The makeup in the group was completely what you describe. We never got twentysomethings. And the thirtysomethings would show up, fearful and upset, but they found something within a few weeks and were gone. ...

... The fortysomethings, well, they'd be in the group for months and even years.

... The fiftysomethings came, and stayed and stayed and stayed, for years, until they gave up and became consultants or business owners or dropped out or moved to a completely different area.

"Lack of skilled workers" is a complete smokescreen (that is, 'bald faced lie'), easily uttered because prosecution is so difficult.
Bladerunnerbldrnrpdx on November 23rd, 2011 11:17 pm (UTC)
And never mind underemployed workers, even in the "skilled" positions, even in some "licensed" and "specialized" positions.