Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:48AM   Printer-friendly
from the they-are-hiding dept.

A couple of years ago it was reported that in 2012 more than half of all American wage earners made less than $30,000 per year. The Social Security Administration's new earnings report for 2014 is out and there's still much gnashing of teeth about the dying middle class. With earnings numbers that haven't changed much in 2 years, estimates running as high as 100 million working age Americans without a job, and no one tracking the population of H-1B visa holders, where are the jobs really?

The July 9, 2015, issue of The New York Review of Books carried a very thoughtful piece by Andrew Hacker. In "The Frenzy About High-Tech Talent," Hacker discusses a number of books and reports that address whether or not there really is a need for more tech talent, the justification for the H-1B visa program, and issues in the American educational system.

[...] Throughout his piece Hacker is basically questioning two things:

1. Is there really an unfilled need for STEM graduates, or are we actually graduating too many so that many end up unemployed or employed in different areas?

2. Are there flaws in the American education system, both at the K-12 level and in college, that lead us to be very dependent on foreign STEM graduates?

[...] The texts Hacker is reviewing, and his own information, seem to dwell predominately on overall job projections for the STEM fields. Nowhere does there appear a breakout of the job forecast for computing related job categories. With the increased ubiquity of computing across all industries and employment sectors, it seems unlikely that we will see the "deskilling" trend that may be occurring in engineering (whereby engineers create equipment that means they and others like them no longer have job opportunities). We know that there are many jobs in the "tech sector" but there are also a lot of computing jobs in banking, finance, manufacturing, agriculture, healthcare, etc. We can get an accurate picture of future job openings only if we can make a good determination of the computing jobs that exist outside of the "tech sector."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:04AM (#255047)

    Humans Need Not Apply [youtube.com]
    Published on Aug 13, 2014

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:30AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:30AM (#255053)

    OK, now that I read TFA, it looks like the problem is that industry does not actually want to pay for skilled workers. They want high-schools to crank out young naive workers who will not demand much pay.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday October 27 2015, @12:39PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 27 2015, @12:39PM (#255070) Journal

      That IS a part of the story - but only part. Jobs are being simplified and compartmentalized, so that an under-educated, unskilled or semiskilled person (or persons) can do the job of an educated highly skilled person.

      Instead of looking at the bottom rungs, or even the middle rungs, on the ladder, look at the upper rungs. Managers once required a modest education, a modicum of insight into human nature, logistics skills, communication skills, and more. Today, managers make fewer and fewer decisions, instead referring to pages and pages of policies. Instead of deciding to award a raise, or to discipline some infraction, "managers" instead get on their computers, to determine whether that person is deserving of reward or discipline.

      "Denise, I'd like to give you a raise, but policy blah blah blah"

      Or, the obverse - "Greg, I realize that you're a good worker, but you did blah blah and policy requires me to suspend you for three days, sign and date here on the bottom line."

      All the way up there on the top rungs, the same thing is going on. It's a cut throat world, where fewer and fewer people are being rewarded for anything. It's only the very upper crusts that are accumulating more and more wealth.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 27 2015, @05:14PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 27 2015, @05:14PM (#255187) Journal

        "Denise, I'd like to give you a raise, but policy blah blah blah"
         
        Actual policy, or, passing the buck?

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday October 27 2015, @05:50PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 27 2015, @05:50PM (#255209) Journal

          Both, I suspect. Passing the buck has always been a favorite pastime among lower management, middle management, and sometimes even upper management. But, HR actually has pointless, petty policies. I listened to a an HR puke telling everyone at a meeting that there would be "no physical contact of any kind". Less than a minute later, the puke pounced on a husband and wife who were sitting to close to each other. Yes, the policies are there, waiting to be trotted out to punish people for nonsense.

          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:32PM

            by frojack (1554) on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:32PM (#255309) Journal

            Actually, the policy book in many places is so complex, that the exact same performance behavior can be rewarded or punished.

            Lots of companies subscribe to these policy manuals from commercial sources. They are often so generic and obtuse that even HR doesn't understand them, but that seminar they attended in Vegas highly recommended that manual.

            Don't think for a minute that the policy is actually controlling. Policy merely provides the excuse for what the manager already decided to do anyway.

            Its like Law. On any given day while going about your business, you could be arrested for SOMETHING, if only someone wanted that to happen. Charges may never be filed. but arrest records will never be purged.

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @07:01PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @07:01PM (#255234)

        Or, the obverse - "Greg, I realize that you're a good worker, but you did blah blah and policy requires me to suspend you for three days, sign and date here on the bottom line."

        Whenever anyone asks you this, the appropriate response is "I am not signing anything. Adults don't pull shenanigans like this. Let's first try to address this like adults."

        • (Score: 2, Funny) by tftp on Tuesday October 27 2015, @08:29PM

          by tftp (806) on Tuesday October 27 2015, @08:29PM (#255267) Homepage

          Let's put some specifics into this scenario:

          B: "Greg, I realize that you're a good worker, but you came to work yesterday so drunk that seventeen workers got secondary alcohol poisoning from your breath. The policy requires me to suspend you for three days; that's the most lenient action that I am allowed to use. I'm willing to help you out because you never did such a thing before. Please sign and date here on the bottom line."

          G: "I am not signing anything. Adults don't pull shenanigans like this. Let's first try to address this like adults."

          B: "OK, Greg, as you wish."

          Security: "Greg Doe, Sir? Please follow us to the door. You may keep your badge if you wish, it had been electronically revoked. Your personal items will be mailed to your address on file."

          • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:38PM

            by frojack (1554) on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:38PM (#255311) Journal

            At which point you should go happily.

            If you were doing anything important it would set the company back much more than it would hurt you. If they have any competition, go there immediate and seek employment.

            If you weren't doing anything important and the job can be filled by any warm corpse, then it sucks to be you, but you are probably better off away from there.

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.