I'll be 50 next month.
That is very frightening!

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.

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.

Yeah, that looks about right. (Says the 57 year old Aerospace Engineering Manager...)

"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.

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.

Can you suggest program items?

The programs are set a year at a time, so, no, not really.

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.

"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.)

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.

And never mind underemployed workers, even in the "skilled" positions, even in some "licensed" and "specialized" positions.