Fall Into the Gap
6/12/12 06:00![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics
A winner is someone who recognizes his God-given talents, works his tail off to develop them into skills, and uses these skills to accomplish his goals. - Larry Bird
When I was training for computer networking skills, I also became A+ certified in computer maintenance and repair. During the course of the classes, several people dropped out. This was because they discovered how low the compensation was for trained computer technicians and felt that it wasn’t worth pursuing.
Manufacturing companies are complaining that they are having a difficult time finding people that can match the technical skills and training they need to run the machinery. At first glance, this would seem to be a golden opportunity for the unemployed to retrain into these skills so they can become employable again.
Throughout the campaign, President Obama lamented the so-called skills gap and referenced a study claiming that nearly 80 percent of manufacturers have jobs they can’t fill. Mitt Romney made similar claims. The National Association of Manufacturers estimates that there are roughly 600,000 jobs available for whoever has the right set of advanced skills.
The reasons cited for losing so many manufacturing jobs include a classic one (automation) and a more current one (outsourcing) and the existing problem (training):
Nearly six million factory jobs, almost a third of the entire manufacturing industry, have disappeared since 2000. And while many of these jobs were lost to competition with low-wage countries, even more vanished because of computer-driven machinery that can do the work of 10, or in some cases, 100 workers. Those jobs are not coming back, but many believe that the industry’s future (and, to some extent, the future of the American economy) lies in training a new generation for highly skilled manufacturing jobs — the ones that require people who know how to run the computer that runs the machine.
The article in the New York Times describes the dilemma that these job prospects face. Union roles are being reduced and starting pay for many of these jobs start at about $10 per hour. If the employee gets an associate’s degree, this amount can go up to $15 per hour and possibly up to $18 per hour after several years of good service.
This is hardly a career path for someone who would want to maintain a middle class lifestyle and support a family. It especially seems so when pursuit of a career at McDonalds is almost as financially attractive as seeking a technical specialization that would have to be kept up to date. And this is also a far cry from the type of career path that is going to approach closing the income gap that is widening in America.
It looks as if the solution to this problem would be an old tried and true one. Put the onus on the companies to do training on the job to get current employees or new employees up to speed on these machines in manufacturing. Yet, this solution has become impractical as well. Per the article:
This is partly because advanced manufacturing is really complicated. Running these machines requires a basic understanding of metallurgy, physics, chemistry, pneumatics, electrical wiring and computer code. It also requires a worker with the ability to figure out what’s going on when the machine isn’t working properly. And aspiring workers often need to spend a considerable amount of time and money taking classes like Goldenberg’s to even be considered. Every one of Goldenberg’s students, he says, will probably have a job for as long as he or she wants one.
The income gap isn’t the only problem in this case. Once again, the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) gap appears to be much to blame for America falling behind and losing our ability to remain competitive internationally in manufacturing. With all the austerity measures being proposed to resolve our national debt, hijacking education would be just another step in gutting the value of our American society.
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 12:54 (UTC)The "income gap," as it were in this case, really is the only problem. Right now, there's a marked difference between what people are willing to pay and what people are willing to work for. That will sort itself out in time, and would sort itself out in private if manufacturing wasn't such a politically convenient football.
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 21:56 (UTC)I would add one caveat: ". . . what people are able to work for." After all, it doesn't matter what kind of job you get; the cheapest rent is the cheapest rent; the cheapest food is the cheapest food; the same goes for health care, transportation, all the goodies that comprise our costs.
Yes, rents can fall; but only if a bunch of units/houses stand empty for a significant period, and only later if the owner is able to refinance at all. Same goes for food production, for autos, for fuel. Too much debt in society in general, and we find the former basement for wage acceptance gets ever higher.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 01:15 (UTC)B..b..b..but that goes against the principle of Third Worlding America. How are the free enterprise profiteers supposed to force wages down unless they lower the pay standards to those of other Third World countries?
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 12:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 13:12 (UTC)It seems like a no brainer, though. Why would anyone choose this job, which may include paying for additional training due to the skills gap, which is a lower paying job that is likely to be outsourced or replaced by a computer? I've heard some ridiculous things in my time, but that's BS.
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 13:50 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 21:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 21:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 02:04 (UTC)Except in HR, evidently.
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 21:58 (UTC)Bingo! This is also the best means of training in an era of shifting tech, but management has adopted a fill-the-post mentality that counts training as an externality and liability.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 02:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 13:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 16:15 (UTC)I wonder how "basic" the skills he claims he needs really are.
Obviously, not basic enough for Americans but basic enough for China and other industrialized countries.
It seems like the curriculum that would teach this would have to be specifically intended to lead to that manufacturing job. (Or the student that learns those things may likely be college bound.) And if that "skills gap" was filled, there may not be time to train the student for other disciplines, leaving "skills gaps" in other areas. And what is his budget for training new hires - is expecting this to be taught at the high school level really just his way of having the government subsidize his job training?
No. Just detailed fundamentals of STEM that are taught in other industrialized countries and that we seem to have fallen behind on in America. We need to be looking at how these other countries were able to outpace us. Specialized training can happen on the job provided the fundamentals are there. Since other countries are capable of doing this, I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to expect the same from America.
It seems like a no brainer, though. Why would anyone choose this job, which may include paying for additional training due to the skills gap, which is a lower paying job that is likely to be outsourced or replaced by a computer? I've heard some ridiculous things in my time, but that's BS.
Which seems to be the prevailing attitude for a lot of things in our society. It if isn’t convenient or immediately accessible, we can’t be bothered with it. Manufacturing used to be a staple of our economy and accessible to the common man. Now, due to inferior education priorities and with education and competitiveness no longer important in this country, we are losing our staple industries to other countries.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 13:52 (UTC)For the last point, I'm just talking about the individual worker's perspective. Business is about rational self-interest, right? It would be altruistic to think, "I'm going to inconvenience myself in order to keep the manufacturing industry strong." Surely the manufacturing company owners aren't thinking that they'll be put out to keep the industry strong.
(no subject)
Date: 8/12/12 03:44 (UTC)Provided Advanced Placement classes are selected. Technology is pretty much touching all sectors in one way or another. This is getting to be at least as valuable as literature, philosophy, religion and even history in a practical sense. We could probably skip advanced calculus in high school and go a little deeper into computer architecture and some concepts of physics than we do for STEM. At least enough of a taste to pique their interest and curiosity.
It would be altruistic to think, "I'm going to inconvenience myself in order to keep the manufacturing industry strong." Surely the manufacturing company owners aren't thinking that they'll be put out to keep the industry strong.
Unfortunately, that has become all to true as of late. As a result, manufacturing skills have fallen into horrible disrepair because training and advancement have not kept up. In the trades, it has been the unions that have promoted apprenticeship programs that have grown these technical skills in a younger generation. Apprenticeship programs have declined with the decline of unions and business expansion.
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 13:36 (UTC)That's part of the problem right there. If you knew that by taking these classes (and getting certified), you could make $30/hr...sure, a lot of people would do that. But the classes aren't a guarantee of a job. (And someone who was making $50/hr in a mine might lose that job and be stuck with a $12/hr one. Then again, the same is true for me. I could lose my current cushy job and be stuck with one where I earn less than half of what I do now as an engineer.)
It doesn't help, either, that the traditional structure is mostly gone. It used to be something like, "You work really hard as a sweeper for $10/hr, but then after a year or so, we'll train you to work doing something a bit better for $15/hr, until after five years or so of work, if you're competent, you'll probably be making around $35/hr in maintenance or as a board operator." (Both of which are less physically taxing than being a sweeper, but do require a lot more in the way of skills.) Somewhere or other, that contract seems to have vanished, which makes it really silly to work as a sweeper - because it may never lead into anything. (I suspect that some of what may have happened is that the lower skill jobs are now fully mechanized. So people now start at a higher level than they would have a few decades ago. And the higher level jobs take a LOT of skills, so it's more than Bubba taking you aside for a few hours when things are quiet and training you how to use the machine.)
Still, I have no respect for the companies whining about how they can't get highly trained people for $15. It's like...yeah...no !@#!. If you pay virtually nothing, you're only going to be able to get untrained people who, long ago, would have been trained by the company, anyway, for better jobs while working for that piddly wage. Trained machinists cost a lot. (And welders make more than engineers do.) Supply and demand, basic economics. You'd think business people would get that.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 02:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 13:36 (UTC)(Sadly, the places that seem to do this best - junior colleges - are woefully underfunded and seem to be the favorite place to try to cut costs.)
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 13:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 17:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 23:18 (UTC)Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu has written heaps on this if you're interested (a former prof of mine Richard Teese has some more accessible papers as well).
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 01:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 05:06 (UTC)It might be art, it might be media studies, it might be sport. The point is that technical schools have a tendency to teach only job skills, leading to a less fulfilled human being with less ability to operate in the world.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 13:48 (UTC)So if they're all offered (and required), no one necessarily loses out.
I really, really wish my high school had offered metal working and carpentry classes. It's not a good thing to start your first job and be like, "What is this?" when you face down a hammer.
(no subject)
Date: 9/12/12 21:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/12/12 22:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/12/12 21:15 (UTC)I do not deny that educational tracks can lead to inequities. There are also cases where students become tracked into an under-performing curriculum at an early age due to teacher prejudice and inadequate training.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 01:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 05:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/12/12 21:33 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/12/12 00:07 (UTC)That does remind me, though ... I was reading recently about ageism in Silicon Valley, about how hard it is for qualified, experienced people with a good track record to get jobs if they were over a certain age.
(no subject)
Date: 10/12/12 16:20 (UTC)As far as higher paid technical work, a good deal of the compensation comes from the reputation of the technician. A beauty operator with a flair for fashion trends in hair design can make hundreds of dollar on a haircut. Young beauticians may earn less than a Starbucks barista but with a heart for the craft they can advance.
(no subject)
Date: 11/12/12 05:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 17:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 6/12/12 23:21 (UTC)Industry has figured out that they can be replaced by twelve-year-olds on their dads' computer in the basement. As such, automating that function has become increasingly easy.
(no subject)
Date: 7/12/12 02:53 (UTC)