resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,244
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jun 5, 2014 16:17:24 GMT -5
In my area, pay is a big issue. We are about a half hour away from a city that pays maybe 20% higher wages, and local employers are complaining that all their applicants expect to get paid as much as they would in the city. Our plumber was indignantly complaining to me on his last visit about how he can't hire anyone because they all expect to get paid about $5 an hour more than he is willing to pay.
Median family income in my area is around $30k and I don't blame a skilled laborer for turning that down and making the drive into the city.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Jun 5, 2014 16:49:11 GMT -5
While I know there are people out there who really don't want to work or don't have may skills I also think people like to whine and that includes employers! Employers around here will bitterly complain that "kids" don't have the work ethic of generations past. Their loudest complaint is the kids applying for summer work don't want to work 40+ hours a week in the summer that is why they have to get H1B visa students from other countries. But whenever I talk to local kids looking for work they always tell me the employers REFUSE to hire anyone for more than 25 hours a week. So with that said I do believe they are having problems filling jobs. Who the heck wants to get a job for 25 hours a week that requires you to be available 7 days a week from 9am till 10 or 11 at night? And paying minimum wage. All it makes me think of is "why can't Sheldon make friends?" That said they do end up getting applications but they are the youngest, least qualified to do anything,. I know shocker.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 5, 2014 17:56:49 GMT -5
I had a very hard time filling a Senior Financial Systems Analyst position a few months ago. It actually made me sad to see the number of resumes from "older" applicants who never kept up with technology. Then I had the candidates who wanted to make as much as me. Then there were applicants who weren't cut out for the high pressure deadlines. I finally got my candidate but had to give her a $10k signing bonus to come aboard.
|
|
Nazgul Girl
Junior Associate
Babysitting our new grandbaby 3 days a week !
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:25:02 GMT -5
Posts: 5,913
Today's Mood: excellent
|
Post by Nazgul Girl on Jun 5, 2014 20:49:31 GMT -5
Now, I'm going to have to watch kittensaver's spelling to see if she makes any mistakes.....
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Jun 5, 2014 23:35:42 GMT -5
So which is it? Do job seekers lack skills, or do employers have unrealistic expectations and are unwlling to train? Or perhaps both? Seems like a lot of employers are holding out for people with a significant amount of relevent experience, and are unwilling to train. Let's take Shelia's job for instance. If I were to apply there, I have never taken worked for a engineering firm and done a great deal of soil and water sampling. I have done enviornmental radiation surveys as part of my previous job. But I don't have certification or direct or significant experience. Would I be considered? What about Milee's job? I have a physics degree, have a basic understanding of electronics and computers, but I'm no technowizard. Would I be considered? I think it's a combination of both. While there are a lot of educated people who haven't learned any marketable skills, there are also a lot of employers who refuse to invest in their employees.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,875
Member is Online
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jun 5, 2014 23:53:29 GMT -5
While I know there are people out there who really don't want to work or don't have may skills I also think people like to whine and that includes employers! Y and if the financial news is to believed, there is also still a lot of "the unemployed need not apply" going on. There are people who want too much in this labor market: those looking for work who expect to run the company within six months and a starting salary to match, and employers who want at least a four year degree for someone to answer the phone at minimum wage and unpaid overtime to boot. Expectations on both sides are often just way too high.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Jun 6, 2014 8:39:58 GMT -5
I think it's a combination of both. While there are a lot of educated people who haven't learned any marketable skills, there are also a lot of employers who refuse to invest in their employees.
Employees have lost that sense of loyalty to employers. Used to be an employer would train you and you'd feel almost "indebted" to them and you'd stay and use that knowledge. Now people seem to take your training and use it to get a new job right away. We've had employees tell us they want to be drivers for us. So we help them get their CDL permit, train them in our trucks, drive them up for their behind the wheel exam, etc. Then a week after they pass they turn in their notice and go work somewhere else.
You better believe the next time a guy comes in and says they want to be a driver that we are going to tell them "great, let us know when you get your license" rather than bend over backwards to help them get their license.
|
|
Cookies Galore
Senior Associate
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 18:08:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,892
|
Post by Cookies Galore on Jun 6, 2014 8:59:42 GMT -5
I'm wondering if that was done on purpose... Kinda, I knew there were misspellings, but as I said, couldn't run spell check and didn't feel like taking the time to look up how to spell proficcient. Proficient. :-) Hubs is always asking me to spell stuff for him, my life is one long spelling bee.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Jun 6, 2014 10:16:51 GMT -5
Now, I'm going to have to watch kittensaver's spelling to see if she makes any mistakes..... Why yes, Virginia, I actually DO make spelling mistakes! I'm actually not a particularly good speller - the highest I ever got in my grade school school spelling bee was I think 5th or 6th place. But like some others on this board I also write for a living, so it's always on the forefront for me. I check myself often. I completely understand that others don't check and frankly don't care. I also completely understand that sometimes it's a typing issue or a grammar issue, not a spelling issue. Totally their choice in how they present themselves in an electronic (or any other) forum or arena. And as always, YMMV. That's why I hesitated when Phoenix asked if it "bothered" me. Bothered is not the right word. I'm just always aware of it, for the reasons above. So watch away, ladies! You may/will find an error now and then. But you definitely won't find 4-5-6 errors in the same post
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 14:15:22 GMT -5
Here in rural America, you have three basic choices for work:
1. WalMart (largest employer) 2. Government (Second largest with low pay but decent benefits) 3. The Underground Economy
Local employers are hard to find that are willing to pay more than minimum wage. And, when you figure driving costs into the costs of working for min, many people find other alternatives.
Even for the "good paying, degree requiring" $10 per hour jobs, that's $80 per day pre-tax and commute costs. My car is $10 in gas per day, truck would be $25. Taxes are about 15%. I figure a "good" job would get me about $45-50 per day worked, net. That is about $1000 per month. Less than most people "make" on social service programs...
This causes a LOT of people here to find other alternatives. Many grow weed for the dispensaries. Others do yard work, restaurant work, farm work, and all the other things locally that don't participate in the tax system.
Cash/pot is king here. Any contractor I have ever came into contact with will work cheaper for cash so they don't have to claim it as income, or will trade for weed.
The second economy is fine for most things, but it also is killing our local tax base. Add to that the fact that people often shop outside the area up in Oregon because there is no sales tax and lower costs, and you get a local government who is seriously struggling to meet basic needs.
Without debating the issue of legal weed, there is going to have to be a change the whole "drug testing" for every job thing. Either that, or people just get SSDI instead because they "can't work."
In my area it is forcing a lot of people to cheat the system rather than get a decent job. And, it's stupid. My smoking a joint on Sat night is no worse than someone having a beer. Yet, they can get a job and I can't. Stupid.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,385
|
Post by movingforward on Jun 6, 2014 15:54:28 GMT -5
The only job I have ever been drug tested for was 20 yrs ago when I was in college and working as a daycare provider, and I think if you are caring for other people's kids then you definitely SHOULD be drug tested. Other than that I have never once been drug tested for an office job. I thought drug testing was really only done if you were operating machinery, driving a vehicle for a living, etc. Maybe it is just different where I live
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 16:02:56 GMT -5
In my county they even drug test in the fields to pick strawberries. You don't see a single ad here that doesn't say they drug test. WalMart does it, grocery stores, convenience stores, fast food, etc....
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 6, 2014 16:03:20 GMT -5
The only job I have ever been drug tested for was 20 yrs ago when I was in college and working as a daycare provider, and I think if you are caring for other people's kids then you definitely SHOULD be drug tested. Other than that I have never once been drug tested for an office job. I thought drug testing was really only done if you were operating machinery, driving a vehicle for a living, etc. Maybe it is just different where I live They are drug testing more and more these days. I know that my former employer was drug testing all new employees that were hired since around 2008ish. I had to go to a local doc in a box a couple years ago and most of the people in the waiting room were waiting to be drug tested. Apparently that's where they got sent for the testing.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,385
|
Post by movingforward on Jun 6, 2014 16:13:02 GMT -5
No, no it's not... No one is FORCING them to cheat the system. They are CHOOSING to cheat the system because they would rather be able to smoke a joint on Saturday night than give it up and get a JOB. I agree with you that smoking a joint once a week is definitely no worse than drinking a beer but saying they are being forced to cheat the system is ridiculous.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 6, 2014 16:18:14 GMT -5
They shouldn't be able to get welfare because they test positive for pot. If they are, it's wrong and should be changed.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 6, 2014 16:22:27 GMT -5
They shouldn't be able to get welfare because they test positive for pot. If they are, it's wrong and should be changed. If they live where pot is legal, why not? Do we give welfare to people who have a drink?
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,385
|
Post by movingforward on Jun 6, 2014 16:32:50 GMT -5
Drug testing for welfare doesn't make financial sense to me; therefore, I don't support it but if a company chooses to drug test then that is their prerogative. People can either choose to abide by that rule or not. If they choose not to then they can't complain about not being able to find a job, and if companies are starting to do more drug tests then I assume there is some sort of reason behind it. Maybe they had problems in the past with people on drugs . I can't think of any reason why they would just decide they need to drug test more. It cost the company money to do it... ETA: And thinking that just because someone can't pass a drug test it gives them the right to cheat the system is ridiculous!
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jun 6, 2014 17:01:54 GMT -5
I think it's a combination of both. While there are a lot of educated people who haven't learned any marketable skills, there are also a lot of employers who refuse to invest in their employees.
Employees have lost that sense of loyalty to employers. Used to be an employer would train you and you'd feel almost "indebted" to them and you'd stay and use that knowledge. Now people seem to take your training and use it to get a new job right away. We've had employees tell us they want to be drivers for us. So we help them get their CDL permit, train them in our trucks, drive them up for their behind the wheel exam, etc. Then a week after they pass they turn in their notice and go work somewhere else.
You better believe the next time a guy comes in and says they want to be a driver that we are going to tell them "great, let us know when you get your license" rather than bend over backwards to help them get their license.
This is why a lot of employers require a commitment to remain with the company for a period of time after training to acquire new skills is completed. Or to reimburse the employer for their costs. At one of my former employers, we promoted and transferred an engineer from Mpls to Chicago. Paid moving expenses, house hunting trips, home sale expenses, home purchase expenses, a transfer bonus, and other expenses. Within 90 days of moving, the engineer quit and went to work for a company they had been interviewing with (we weren't aware they were looking for another job) while we were in the process of transferring them. The employee took the transfer only because the prospective employer wouldn't pay to relocate them from Mpls to Chicago. About $30K down the tubes. Now, when you move, get significant tuition assistance, etc., you sign a contract committing to continued employment or repayment of the investment.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jun 6, 2014 17:15:50 GMT -5
Without debating the issue of legal weed, there is going to have to be a change the whole "drug testing" for every job thing. Either that, or people just get SSDI instead because they "can't work." In my area it is forcing a lot of people to cheat the system rather than get a decent job. And, it's stupid. My smoking a joint on Sat night is no worse than someone having a beer. Yet, they can get a job and I can't. Stupid. Shasta, for the most part, employers have the option of establishing their own employment criteria. They can decline to hire people with what they consider to be excessive visible piercings, for drinking, for driving the wrong type of car, for not driving a car, for having long hair, for having a shaved head, for not wearing the appropriate clothes, or for smoking pot. I don't think people are "forced to cheat the system" so much as the choices that some people knowingly make prevent them from meeting employer's expectations for the people they are willing to hire. Kind of like interviewing for the manager of a high end clothing store while wearing a dirty t-shirt, torn jeans, and beat up sneakers. Often, it's the choices people make.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 18:43:18 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I seriously looked for a job outside my current employer. But one thing that stuck with me from way back then was checking what positions my previous employer had available and some of them required a bachelors degree and only paid $8/hour. I made more than that doing data entry for the same company, no degree required. I was surprised to learn that I also made more money than a bank teller that had to dress a certain way, handle all that money and risk getting a gun shoved in their face on the day. Things like that didn't make sense to me then and they don't make sense to me now.
I had a coworker at my current job finish college and quit to be a teacher. I thought it was kind of crazy that she had to take a big paycut to go from being a blue-collar worker to being a professional in a field that's so valuable to our society.
I can see how it would be discouraging to spend a lot of money getting educated or learning a skill to only make a couple of dollars more than minimum wage. On the other hand, I can also see how people are delusional about how much what they have to offer is worth to a company. I also think some employers want employees that have the knowledge and skills they need, but don't want to pay for accordingly. Like a friend of mine explained to me, he spent a lot of money and put a lot of effort into going to school to get the training and certicfications to work in his industry but some people want him to practically give away what he's learned for free.
It seems like employers are often very demanding. They want their employees to know this, be able to do that, be available at all hours of the day and night, work irregular schedules, never take time off work, blah blah blah. Who wants to do all that and not even make decent money?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 7, 2014 7:06:16 GMT -5
They shouldn't be able to get welfare because they test positive for pot. If they are, it's wrong and should be changed. If they live where pot is legal, why not? Do we give welfare to people who have a drink? Shouldn't. If you've got money for booze, you don't need welfare.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,244
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jun 7, 2014 8:08:46 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pot thing. Legal or not, it doesn't seem worth the cost of being jobless or stuck in an under-the-table job. I would give it up in a heartbeat to be able to work and better my standard of living.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 11:51:28 GMT -5
My point was...
Certain people are excluded from jobs for a bad driving history.
Other people are excluded from jobs for using LEGAL pot.
Other people are excluded for having legal issues.
Other people are excluded for bad credit, even though their jobs have nothing to do with that....
Other people are excluded because they have XYZ reason....
It's all good and fine. Except, together that is a LOT of people. What are they expected to do to earn a living when even the local "shit jobs" require no negative history to hire for $8? Answer - crime, more drug abuse, selling drugs to eat, and starting their own economy that is in direct competition against tax payers.
It happens in the ghetto and it happens in small town America as well. But, the cause is the same.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 11:53:09 GMT -5
Honestly, I am really interested to see what happens in CO now that recreational is legal. If every employer drug tests there, they will soon find they are short on applicants. At some point, maybe they will stop discriminating against people who choose legal weed over legal alcohol for their relaxation.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 23:40:38 GMT -5
Pot doesn't stay in your system a long time. The metabolites they test for in drug testing are stored in your body's fat for up to 30 days.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 9, 2024 18:26:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 23:45:06 GMT -5
We've had a lot of trouble filling positions in San Diego at our company. We've closed REQs and reopened them at foreign sites just so we could fill them with qualified individuals.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 8, 2014 14:47:28 GMT -5
My cousin is an auto mechanic.....a very good one and he has supported himself very well with this for as long as I can remember. However, he is reaching retirement age and he wants to retire in the next few years. He owns his own business, which is the major repair shop in this small town and he wants to train someone and gradually turn over the reins.
So for the last several years, he has brought what he thought were promising kids into the business, paid them a decent wage with benefits, only to have fired them.
His biggest problems?
Not showing up on time, ready to work. Stealing from him. Lying to him (not doing work they said they did). Taking off in the middle of the day, without notice. Spending time on the clock incessantly texting.
And a few other problems. None of these are due to lack of talent, only lack of willingness to work.
There is absolutely no need or my cousin to pass this business on. He owns the garage and equipment and can shut it down. Loss of the business is going to hurt the town more than him, he does not need the income. He was planning on selling the building and equipment at a large loss, only to help someone get a start on owning a business.
|
|
jinksd1
Established Member
Joined: Aug 25, 2011 7:25:50 GMT -5
Posts: 310
|
Post by jinksd1 on Jun 8, 2014 17:59:26 GMT -5
I can speak for some of the lower-end jobs, because that's what I've always worked. No doubt the workers and work pool in general can be blamed in a lot of instances, as we've seen suggested throughout this thread. But it's not always the employees that are the problem.
Sometimes I wonder if managers or owners of small companies consider that they may be the problem when it comes to retaining workers. I've quit jobs for several bosses that I couldn't stand working for. One boss would scream at any employee that made the smallest mistake. One owner of a motel trained me for an hour on how to run the desk, then took off and expected me to deal with everything on my own with that little training and experience. My current boss is an extreme micro-manager that likes to hand-hold me through every basic function of my job (on top of being difficult to work with in other ways), but probably wonders why people in my position keep leaving. Someone I know took a job a few months ago where they promised her certain things, only to immediately change it around as soon as she started (yes, lying to your employees will make them not want to work for you). And of course I've heard horror stories on this forum and in real life about crap bosses, favoritism, lying to employees, piling on more work for no extra pay, expecting people to be "on call" all the time, etc. Yeah, sometimes a boss is just too much of an ass for work for and will drive people away.
Some jobs are always going to be high turnover because the work itself sucks on multiple levels and appeals to very few people, so as soon as a worker can get a better/easier job for about the same amount of pay, she will. Things like waitressing or working fast food fall into this category for a lot of people. Most people will choose something, anything else if they get the chance, even if it's only a job that pays the same, like retail, stocking shelves at a grocery store, working at a gas station, or an entry-level desk job.
Then there are the employers who don't want to pay well, not just in the hourly wage, but also in how many hours they give. Yeah, you're going to have a hard time retaining anyone with low pay and low hours once they have some experience and can at the very least find a full-time equivalent, which will pay more even if the hourly wage is the same.
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Jun 8, 2014 21:24:45 GMT -5
From my perspective: Company I worked for for 20 years moved out of the area. I had 17 years experience running a dept I had 3 years experience managing vendors - brokered deals that saved the company 30-40% I was earning >$20/hr ONLY offers/jobs were for $10/hr - that was barely over unemployment & I did NOT have to spend time/money (gas) commuting. As it happened my Dad's health went into a major decline & I was unable to work for several years. I am now officially retired. This is a huge issue in my industry. Typically employers advertise positions asking for the moon (significant experience and at least a bachelors degree), but pay peanuts and have crappy benefits. I feel like many employers got carried away when unemployment was almost 10% and haven't realised that unemployment for people over 25 with college degrees is 3.2%. I don't think it's all on the employers. I do think some potential employees have unrealistic salary expectations, but in general I think those people are the minority. One example I've seen recently is an assistant position that pre-recession would have been considered an entry level position for someone with some college, that now requires a bachelors degree (graduate preferred), 3-5 years of industry specific experience, and pays less than 30k. It is no wonder that they get crappy quality candidates apply. I also think Generation Y have different expectations of work and benefits, and I think employers longer term are going to have to adapt if they want to hire the cream of the crop.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,230
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 8, 2014 22:15:31 GMT -5
... I also think Generation Y have different expectations of work and benefits, and I think employers longer term are going to have to adapt if they want to hire the cream of the crop. In my mind we are talking across the board, not just "cream of the crop". There is a serious mismatch between what employers are willing to pay for "x" amount of effort (be it prior educational attainment and\or current work effort) and what potential employees are willing to provide for that amount of money. It is going to get interesting.
|
|