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.
Your conclusion is good, but I don't see much merit in the implications you claim with regard to hiring new employees. Employers need to stop pinching pennies with regard to the professional staff of the employees they already have, not hire people who aren't qualified to do the work that they need done.
It is very much natural to expect when you're buying something that what you're buying is whole. If I buy a television, I don't want to have to develop it into something that displays red, green and blue, but rather I want it to arrive that way. By the same token, if I want a media room, I am willing to invest money in my den to develop it into a media room.
I'm not sure I agree with your analogy. It seems more like the OP is saying that employers are looking for a media room that can be delivered all in one piece and rejecting any model that needs even the smallest amount of customization. Or a television that already comes preprogrammed with a specific channel package without the need of hooking it up to a cable service rather than simply a television that shows all available colors. Although I think nowadays they might actually have TVs like that.
Anecdotally, I did have something like what the OP is talking about happen to me in a job search a few years ago, but only once. I got a call from a recruiter who said she noticed my resume said I had experience at X, and had a job opening for someone with experience at X123. I told her I actually did have experience with X12, and even X124 but not X123 and she said sorry we need the entire X123. I remember wondering if she was going to have to try to hunt down the guy who vacated the job and see if she could talk him in to returning.
Companies are willing to invest in people who properly invest in themselves. They'll meet you half way. If you worked hard in school, went to Stanford or some good school, got a good education, and built a portfolio, companies will be fighting over you and willing to train you even more. If you just coasted, went through a low ranked college program, and came out without a single piece of published work, you haven't shown the ability to learn and thus are a risk. Employers won't invest in a risk.
The reality is that we're producing more degree holders than we are producing educated people. And that's a big problem.
The outsourcing model is a great solution, however. It turns the people into the product and employers will invest in the product.
I gotta say, you had me with you until I got to that last little paragraph. Although I don't agree that only people from the top schools are qualified for their chosen profession, except maybe in rare and specific fields.
Are universities in India really so superior to ours that so many of them can be compared to our most elite institutions? That must be the case if the people doing the hiring feel they are going to get such a superior product if they outsource. Either that or the lower wages make training more palatable.
Problem: Today so many people that are trained, immediately after training go out and look for a new employer willing to pay them more money.
So we have employers who are not loyal to their employees and employees who are not loyal to their employers. In order for this situation to improve, someone's going to have to blink. Who should blink first?
You also have the problem of employers locking people in to a salary range once they are hired at a certain rate. Once employees get a certain amount of experience some employees feel their compensation should reflect that. Yearly COL raises don't always get you there. Best way to get there is to switch jobs, at least until a certain experience level is reached. Once you max out staying put makes more sense.
The point of an analogy isn't to necessarily make you like the implication but rather point out that the parallel is there, and therefore some assertion made earlier either does or doesn't have the legitimacy it was originally asserted to have. Analogies aren't supposed to be exact examples of the scenario - that would be a tautology. I was talking to you from first-hand experience. What I relayed - the difference between the expectation when you're buying something new versus upgrading something you already have - is real, even if it undercuts you point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Bully
It seems more like the OP is saying that employers are looking for a media room that can be delivered all in one piece and rejecting any model that needs even the smallest amount of customization.
No: The OP said nothing about "the smallest amount". It was far more sweeping a pronouncement than you're implying it was. No one in this thread has said that it makes sense to reject candidates based on "insignificant" differences. The matter of insignificance has not be raised at all, and nor should it be. Perhaps the problem is that you're not using the employer's definition of significant time and money and instead trying to impose your own preference about how much they should be willing to spend without considering it a significant expense. That's bound to cause you confusion.
I gotta say, you had me with you until I got to that last little paragraph. Although I don't agree that only people from the top schools are qualified for their chosen profession, except maybe in rare and specific fields.
Are universities in India really so superior to ours that so many of them can be compared to our most elite institutions? That must be the case if the people doing the hiring feel they are going to get such a superior product if they outsource. Either that or the lower wages make training more palatable.
Some universities in India are extremely good, while others are not. It's the same as any country. Why would you suggest that people go to college in India? We have perfectly good schools here. People outsourcing/hiring could care less about Indian universities. There's no relation. We can develop talent in the US. The outsourcing model is a great way to do so.
It works both ways. If you can't find a job, you're incompetent.
BS:
when the # of jobseekers even skilled ones >> # of jobs available there is no excuse for a company to not find the employees they need other than ineptness. [Note I said need not necessarily the young highly skilled purple squirrels willing to work for peanuts they may want]
When the number of jobs << number of workers seeking work It is natural finding a job becomes a nightmare.
Some universities in India are extremely good, while others are not. It's the same as any country. Why would you suggest that people go to college in India? We have perfectly good schools here. People outsourcing/hiring could care less about Indian universities. There's no relation. We can develop talent in the US. The outsourcing model is a great way to do so.
We must have some disconnect on what the definition of the term outsourcing is. Or I'm missing something. Wouldn't be the first time.
when the # of jobseekers even skilled ones >> # of jobs available there is no excuse for a company to not find the employees they need other than ineptness. [Note I said need not necessarily the young highly skilled purple squirrels willing to work for peanuts they may want]
When the number of jobs << number of workers seeking work It is natural finding a job becomes a nightmare.
The late 90s were the inverse of 2014, too few skilled people per available opening, and corps were rightfully having a very difficult time even when offering stellar compensation packages.
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.
