Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
many customers have nasty attitudes these days so people dont want to put up with the public anymore. many managers are in their spot due to nepotism and dont really deserve to be there
Here's what I think happened. Wages for regular working folk have been pretty stagnant since the 70's. But the middle class wasn't going to give up without a fight. First the women went to work when they figured out the 1 wage earner standard was no longer possible. Then everyone started working more. And last people started using too much credit.
Employers got smarter and greedier. Increases in productivity were supposed to bring in more money for everyone but employers had a new strategy. Keep everyone in a constant state of anxiety about keeping their jobs. Initiate wave after wave of reorganizations, downsizing, and layoffs. The workers will be glad just to have a job and much more reluctant to ask for more. Bust unions and end collective bargaining.
Something happened in Washington DC. Just saying greed doesn't completely explain it. Perhaps someone who actually understands more about this can expand on my thoughts. We no longer had a citizen Congress. The incumbents were re-elected every time because no one new had the necessary funds to effectively campaign against them. Somewhere along the way, these people forgot the government was supposed to be all about serving the people. They completely forgot about the people and started serving whomever would give them the most money. Corporations and the very rich reaped huge benefits while the rest of us just struggled along. Campaigns got very ugly. I doubt even George Washington would have stood a chance with the scrutiny and mud slinging that's common today. Me personally, even if I was the best human for the job, I doubt I would run for office in the climate we have today. It's all about the money. For the people is pretty much dead and gone. Now it's for the lobbyists.
Next came advances in technology which led to globalization. Computers and finally the internet started pushing the middle class off the cliff. And the race to the bottom began in earnest. Once upon a time, ABC Accounting employed 50 accountants. Then the computer arrived on the scene and 30 accountants were let go. The 30 scrambled for work and most of them found something but more than half lost money and benefits. Next the internet and the cloud arrived. They outsourced all their accounting work to India and laid off the the other 20 accountants. They scrambled for work and most of them were not able to find equivalent work and had to take a few steps down the employment ladder. Today, ABC Accounting has a small sales staff that works on commission and an IT guy to keep those computers/infrastructure running. Can anyone even remember when companies paid a lot of people just to answer the phone and direct calls?
Everyone forced to take a few steps down displaced someone else. There were no longer enough middle class jobs to go around. Supply and demand. Employers loved it. No more full time. No more paying for benefits! They could pay less and ask for more. Anxiety was now built in to the workforce. Scared people don't ask for raises or benefits. The poorest people were hurt the most. Where do you go if you are displaced from Walmart? What's a step or two lower than that?
Fast forward to today and people are angry. Maybe even angry enough to do something about it. Don't get me wrong, there are tons of jobs out there. But they don't pay enough to live on. No benefits, part time, no paid time off, and no money. After all, what's the value of a job that won't pay you even enough to rent a room? Too many people have been cobbling together a substandard living on multiple part time jobs for too long.
I agree with this. I will add one more piece of the puzzle.
Health care costs have skyrocketed and are a big reason why employers don't want to give benefits and/or don't give much in raises. Because the cost is still often heavily subsidized by the employer, much of the increased cost is invisible to the employee. Part of the wage stagnation problem is a health care cost problem.
“Though rising healthcare costs eat away at wage growth for everyone, the effects will be largest for the working and middle class because their healthcare costs are so large relative to the rest of their compensation package,” the report said.
What I don't understand is why both employers and employees don't cooperate and make a serious effort to address the unhealthy lifestyle habits that are contributing to the upward spiral in costs. Yes, I know the health care industry is greedy. But does anyone really think we'll ever have affordable health care when 2/3 of the populace is overweight and 1/3 is obese?
It's like I've said before....America abandoned the ethic of deferred gratification (obesity, 40% out of wedlock birth rate) just when it needed it the most. I'm not the only one to point that out:
It's like I've said before....America abandoned the ethic of deferred gratification (obesity, 40% out of wedlock birth rate) just when it needed it the most. I'm not the only one to point that out:
I'm completely in agreement. But in other C-D threads currently posting, I've noted that my argument keeps coming back to the fact that America cannot stand for less fat people. Less indebted people. Or those who would delay instant gratification. We don't finance vehicles anymore for people who can't wait: everyone finances. It used to be 20% down for a house; we nearly blew up the world by offering so many unqualified people 0% down. Point is, America is dependent now on dependency.
It's hard to figure out whether it's truly good or bad, because there's so much propaganda.
The recruiters and employers that dare to breathe a word about this to me have universally said that getting a job today is nothing like it was back then. It is so different that I don't think people have really adjusted to how big the change has been. My generation has had no preparation for this, our parents weren't prepared either for how different the economy would change when we shifted from manufacturing into service economies.
In their day, you walked out of university and into a job. Simple as that. You studied for your degree, and when you completed education, there were employers lining up to give out jobs. If you were a lazy sack of £!"$! then it would be pretty obvious because you didn't have a job. But most normal, respectable people would have work, and you would be able to support yourself very comfortably, buy a house and have a car in those times even working a simple menial job.
Today you will not be able to do this. Yes, you can still succeed, but back then, it was much easier for your honest hard work to be recognized and get rewarded for it. These days employers are so saturated and spoiled for choice, they don't even have to pay a living wage if they don't want to. Many don't even bother.
I know this was true of one of my own parents, they walked straight into jobs for life. My mother quit hers to have me, and my father didn't just get a job, he got a whole company. They had no understanding that by the time we were of age, that jobs were no longer an entitlement.
In today's world, in my current jobseeking, I have made an application for a role in a logistics/repair company. They made a long telephone interview. After liking the cut of my gib, they took me in for a second interview. They made me perform competency tests, answer questions for 25 minutes, toured me across the 2 levels of their office, talked me through my CV (resume) in detail, made me answer more questions, and sat me down with a floor colleague so I could 'embrace the vibe'. What was I rewarded with, four working days later? That's right - a third interview.
The previous generation just doesn't understand how different the world is now, and how confused and disorganized our industries and workforce has become. They honestly believe that a hard worker is entitled to a job, because they work hard. They legitimately cannot grasp that an unemployed person is not lazy.
Where's the problem coming from? Our rotten education system. Not only is our education incompatible with modern work, unprepared to teach students about work, offering subject matter unrelated to work and irrelevant courses as means to work, the cost of it has become massively over-inflated. Employers don't even take most degrees seriously anymore. It's a sick double rip-off - suckering kids into paying for worthless degrees that lead to nowhere and exploiting them in the most disgusting way.
What's even more incredible is that there are people out there with picket signs and slogans who aren't just claiming that it is good, but that it isn't even enough - they want more. More useless qualifications, more diluted and feelgood subjects, lower standards, higher quantities and lower qualities for everyone. Let even lazy people get a degree! That'll teach the bourgeois!
Companies now have to face a triple blow of greedy universities, spoiled middle-class dreamers, and over-consumerism, and it's so unfair to the 95% of people just like you and me who were brought up with the view of the previous generation: that hard work ultimately leads to a job. Now companies have to be virtually paranoid about their pickings because they can't rely on their workforce anymore. We're told that anybody can be anything, you can switch jobs whenever you want, why not switch industries... why not pursue your DREAMâ„¢ job? No wonder companies have adapted to force applicants that they must jump through more hoops than ever. And I can't blame them.
Good here, no problems finding a job when I wanted to before. Friends from it to finance have jobs too. I don't see "underemployed" people, I see people who didn't get the experience needed in college and expect to be paid a mid career salary whining though.
Also see a lot of people picking degrees that aren't geared to "entry" jobs and are shocked when no one hires them since they have no experience. MBA, management and such... who wants to hire administration or management with no prior experience actually administrating or managing people? Those degrees are for people working and want to move up since they hit a wall. Not for people starting out. No way anyone is trusting a 22 year old with no experience to managing a $10 million project
eyeb, I did want to respond to this post. It's good that you and people like you have jobs. For some people, that has been the norm, and it is a blessing for you that you have not had to face unemployment and the strict job requirements that most job descriptions have now.
I don't agree that people right out of college necessarily want management jobs. If you have not been in the job market in awhile, it is very tough, and honestly, I don't think people who have been employed understand how difficult it is. Some people try to get food service and/or retail jobs and find that they can't get hospitality-type jobs because there is so much competition for those. Companies use these as stepping stones and value some kind of customer service position more than GPA, which is understandable but is disappointing for people who worked hard in school but still were unable to get internships or jobs because of the high competition.
It would be frustrating to have applicants who are Millennials who are demanding management-type roles out of college, but for some, that is not the norm. Often entry-level postings still require 1 to 2 years of similar work; if you just graduated with a degree, you will not get those jobs unless you have a personal connection or some kind of advantage over the competition; and, if you look at the job websites, 50 to 100 people or more might apply for these types of jobs with organizations.
I agree with this. I will add one more piece of the puzzle.
Health care costs have skyrocketed and are a big reason why employers don't want to give benefits and/or don't give much in raises. Because the cost is still often heavily subsidized by the employer, much of the increased cost is invisible to the employee. Part of the wage stagnation problem is a health care cost problem.
“Though rising healthcare costs eat away at wage growth for everyone, the effects will be largest for the working and middle class because their healthcare costs are so large relative to the rest of their compensation package,†the report said.
What I don't understand is why both employers and employees don't cooperate and make a serious effort to address the unhealthy lifestyle habits that are contributing to the upward spiral in costs. Yes, I know the health care industry is greedy. But does anyone really think we'll ever have affordable health care when 2/3 of the populace is overweight and 1/3 is obese?
It's like I've said before....America abandoned the ethic of deferred gratification (obesity, 40% out of wedlock birth rate) just when it needed it the most. I'm not the only one to point that out:
There is no negotiation between the employee and the employer with regards to medical insurance. I get to select what options are available off that menu, or none at all. I can't go down the policy and buy the features that mean the most to me a la carte. Most employers do not subsidize gym memberships or have an exercise facility. Most don't have a cafeteria serving healthy food. Even though things like standing desks and laptops should facilitate moving around, many people are still stuck to the cubicle - we have lots of new, modern office furniture in the lobby area that would at least get people out of their seat, but everyone has desktops so they're anchored to the chair.
Much of the food that's available for sale is unhealthy. When I worked in southwest Virginia, a very poor area, there was very little produce and fresh vegetables available in the grocery stores, but plenty of chips, soda, processed junk, etc. Eating healthy living in that area is going to be difficult.
People need to take responsibility for their own circumstances but I think the situation is more nuanced.
In their day, you walked out of university and into a job. Simple as that. You studied for your degree, and when you completed education, there were employers lining up to give out jobs. If you were a lazy sack of £!"$! then it would be pretty obvious because you didn't have a job. But most normal, respectable people would have work, and you would be able to support yourself very comfortably, buy a house and have a car in those times even working a simple menial job.
That happened years ago when jobs were plentiful. But then came the Clintons and NAFTA and trade imbalances that robbed the US of manufacturing and related jobs. The US has become a welfare nation where working is actually penalized and good jobs don't exist anymore.
It's not a strange economy, it's a far worse economy than your parents had!
This is typical of what posters are saying right and left, in one form or another. They think they would be great at a job as they like the sound of the job, which can be working at Office Depot, or a very technical job. But the refuse to accept the fact, that if there 100 applicants that there will be at least 5 who will be perfect for the job with the right training and experience to step right into the job and be a perfect fit.
The quote above, thinks they could be a cashier because they think they are good with computers. The employer says no, because the person stutters and knows they do have a speech issue from time to time.
The employer has a certain need, and there will be applicants that can fill the need adequately. They are not going to hire someone that does not fit their needs, when there are those that do.
A lot of people with an IT degree, do not seem to understand that the programs they understand, are not of any value to the employer. They need someone that already has adequate knowledge to handle it. Lets use as an example a specialized business program that runs an entire large company, often with multiple facilities around the country. They need a new division head, to oversee the entire program.
The person hired, must also have a good background in accounting to know how to adapt the program to handle accounting and teach the accountants the new system. They also must understand inventory, planning, etc., etc., with the end goal that the CEO can pull up any information immediately which can tell him exactly what their cash on hand position is, how much inventory they are holding in a particular area, is the order system keeping them going on a basis that brings raw materials to their system as needed without a need to store inventory, but at the same time know they will be able to run at full bore on the assembly line. And on and on. They may have 500 users using the computer system, and know how to pass a SOX government decreed audit, and not pay any fines for being out of line. They will have had several specialized schools, to understand the system. It takes years to get to the point they know the system well enough to make it fully functional.
I know a woman that wanted a change, with that type of knowledge. She put herself on DICE and within 10 days, had 43 different firms from New York to the Silicon Valley. From Florida, to Maine. All large firms that were desperate to find someone with her talent. She never got by a quick phone interview that they did not make offers to her well into 6 figures, with fantastic benefits. They were all telling her if she got another better offer, get back with them and they would top it. She chose 1 in the city she wanted to retire to in a few years. It had 123 different facilities (locations) that she would be in charge of. Everyone of those companies had been looking for the right person from 2 to 5 years.
A lot of new college IT graduates think they could handle the job, and they could pick up the new program in a week or two. Boy are they wrong, or at least due to experience the company knows they are not able to do the job.
Old trader, I love your stories and envy your easily understandable writing style.
But in this case, I have one question:
Is the moral of this story that if you become a world-class expert on some random business program that may or may not have ANY demand in the future, and you luck out in that one program somehow becoming a nation-wide standard, AND for some reason nobody else sees the writing on the wall while it is becoming more and more important in the business world so that there is literally zero competition for you, that you can write your own ticket in the job market? I don't understand how such a program can take hold so tenaciously across an industry when there is nobody in those organizations who can use it properly.
Old trader, I love your stories and envy your easily understandable writing style.
But in this case, I have one question:
Is the moral of this story that if you become a world-class expert on some random business program that may or may not have ANY demand in the future, and you luck out in that one program somehow becoming a nation-wide standard, AND for some reason nobody else sees the writing on the wall while it is becoming more and more important in the business world so that there is literally zero competition for you, that you can write your own ticket in the job market? I don't understand how such a program can take hold so tenaciously across an industry when there is nobody in those organizations who can use it properly.
Then use COBOL as an example, I don't recall it being taught in colleges these days (I am not a computer person so I don't know for sure, just don't remember seeing books on it in campus store)
And most of the COBOL people are retiring, and large companies that initially setup using cobol now work hard (pay well) to retain or recruit people with cobol skills.
It isn't a "growing" field since nothing new is coming out of it, but the demand is there to keep what is using it up and running.
Or the old adage of being a doctor, the human body hasn't "changed" much, old methods of seeing patients and home visits still work. They aren't efficient, but doctors who make home visits make a lot because few are left doing it.
another healthcare example, cytologiststs who read pap smears, because of a law that mandates how many smears one person can read per day, there is a demand for more people. The test is widely popular now, and growing. With the cap in place, the only way to get them read is to hire more people (or automate it for "negatives"). I worked with one that decided to quit the hospital, and they went to a private company that set up a work area in their home and they read the slides out of their home now http://www.captodayonline.com/Archiv...804_QandA.html
Quote:
CLIA regulations specify a 100-slide maximum limit for manual screening in 24 hours over a minimum eight-hour work day. This translates to a maximum screening rate of 12.5 slides per hour for manual screening.
Good blood bankers/microbiologists can "write" own ticket because of the "manual" work for job. They may forget everything else about the lab, and only know that one area, but they will always be employed unless they get themselves fired.
It doesn't even matter if more people are "entering" the field, the way modern medicine is setup, the amount of testing keeps going up, labs are having problems keeping up with retiring people as is, not to mention future growth. At this point, I can pretty much land in any city in the US and find a current opening.
Then came the Clintons and NAFTA and trade imbalances that robbed the US of manufacturing and related jobs.
Sure, Clinton deserves criticism for signing it. But I always put more blame on the people who actually create these "free trade" bills in the first place and they're usually always conservative lawmakers. There are very, very, very few people on the right who vote against any outsourcing bill.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
