No jobs out there? Think again.

But of course, there's a catch.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/3...s-across-america-are-qualified/#ixzz1WZghgidq

Yeah, we really need to get our heads out of the liberal arts college mentality.

As I was reading i was preparing myself to ask if they were doing anything to get people the training they needed.

this, to me, is a place where "big government" can indeed be a good thing. People think as a Liber-conservative i must be against the government helping people on hard times, I'm not - I just wish they would do it smarter.

If there was some agency of the Department of labor that served to match up good candidates for these jobs and paid for the training - even paid to help relocate the newly trained people if the local educational institution couldn't deliver a strong enough stream, - it would have to be more economically efficient than simply paying UI benefits.

Provided of course the thing wasn't co-oped as a cheap way to pump up union rolls along the way...

My wife's tech certificate has gotten her more and better jobs than many of my friends with Bachelor's.

Maybe she's sucking dick for the cause. A little casting couch action?

That would probably help her put that useless degree into action.

We're in a "college bubble." We've sold ourselves on the idea that EVERYONE has to go to college and now we have a wealth of college graduates who can't find jobs. Politicians have made tuition deductible and loans easy to get, scholarships are plentiful, financial aid available, low cost community colleges an option, etc., etc. And much of it produces (frankly) over-educated unskilled workers.

Don't get me wrong. I'm pro-education and I think if you want to have a good job in the future, you better get some. But if you spend three or four years around the J.C. to come out with an AA in Environmental Studies or Geography, do you REALLY think that you're going to be USEFUL in a modern workforce?

That piece of paper called a degree, for many majors, means nothing. It's a certificate of attendance. And it may show deep knowledge in a field that has ZERO practical value.

We've bought into the idea that if you get that degree, the jobs will come. Well, that's probably true for some degrees. The more ambitious (read: difficult) ones--medicine, law, engineering, the hard sciences--probably will. There's always a problem getting enough talented people in these fields. People with these degrees have some options.

But your French Literature degree? Probably worthless, except to teach other people French Literature, thereby multiplying the futility.

Many people going to college these days would be far better off if they got into an entry-level position in the workforce. Or (as Anc suggests) go to trade school to learn some highly specialized skill. I'm not sure what dental assistants or paralegals earn these days, but I'm sure it's way more than the guy with the Latin American Studies degree.

To be fair, Geography majors (esp. at the four-year level) do get GIS (and some cartograohic) training, which does add some level of competiveness... Now I just need to learn HOW to fuckin' compete

Sorry, that wasn't aimed at you personally or anything.

The thing to remember is: if there are more graduates than jobs in your particular field, you must do something to set yourself apart from the others. Lots of people have the same degree; you have to give someone a reason to hire you!

I don't understand why the Feds aren't more selective about what they will subsidize. The MyCAA program (Army) which is paying for my wife to turn her tech certificate into an Associates of Applied Sciences will only give money for training in high demand fields. And only for up to two years and to an Associates. By having it time limited you also reduce the chances for lag, so the odds are higher there will still be demand for the job once you are out.

I suspect that by supporting only two year programs, the program managers greatly reduce their chances of getting their forecasting wrong. You're not likely to have a need for 20,000 extra whatevers one year, and then none (or a glut) two years later.

There is definitely a need for dental assistants... and, hell, you don't even necessarily need to go to school for that. A lot of dental assistants get on the job training.

I know people in manufacturing who are running their departments in constant overtime and are desperate for new hires, but can't find anyone. Sometimes it's because the applicants don't have any of the needed skills and the training department is gone. Sometimes it's because people who were used to the old union shops come in, work for half a day, say "this is too hard" and walk off. And sometimes it's because, even with unemployment well above 10 percent, there are a lot of people who have absolutely no idea how to conduct themselves when looking for a job and in many cases don't even show up to the interview.

This is where the stimulus went wrong. Instead of focusing on rewarding key Democratic constituencies and providing grants for local governments to do projects they were probably going to do anyway, it should have focused intensely on helping people go back to school for additional training and helping employers bring back the training programs they had to cut during the downturn.

Didn't you used to claim to be above trolling peoples family members?

I'm trying to hire one of my people a personal assistant. The dearth of folks who want to come in and have me pay them to read and answer the occasional phone call is more than my mind can handle.

I've taken to doing one week trials before I make a formal hiring offer. It's the only way to go. :|

As a nation, there are those who work hard, and then there are lazies.

It's child prostitution, isn't it?

Yep, Stossel was warming us up for those "hard realities".

Ehh, he says a lot of things....

Perhaps manufacturing companies should take some cues from domestic software companies have been doing, and pledge not to send the jobs overseas and do the training themselves rather than expecting colleges to provide them with up-to-date knowledgeable workers. More apprenticeship-type programs. Because otherwise kids are still stuck in the no experience, can't get a job/no job, can't get experience rut.

This story is a little misleading IMO. A quick look at the job requirements on most of these shows the problem. Everyone wants 2 to 5 years experience in the specific field. Most people looking don't have that. If they asked for hard workers with job experience and they'd be willing to train them (obviously not very technical positions) these jobs would be filled.

Same here. I couldn't find a job for the better part of a year with a bachelor's and ten years IT experience. I got my certificate, and had a job within a month.

When has that ever been different?

Oh, Baldar. You're so bald.

Life ain't easy for a boy named Sue.

Yeah...I didn't see this until evenflow linked it in the other thread.

Low fucking shit Sokar.

Bring back apprenticeship programs! Hire teachable teenagers who want to learn, let them start at the bottom, learn the trade and work their way up the ladder. Better than wasting 4-6 years in college for nothing.

The program Zel was blessed enough to get into is more like what should be out there.

It was a four year apprenticeship program where he had on the job training mixed with college classes. He was paid to work and attend class and the company paid for his education as well. He got his Associates of Science from Maine Maritime Academy.

It was hard work..but a fabulous opportunity. For him and for the company to get employees trained just the way they want them to be.

Meh. We have more highly educated and trained people than ever because getting loans for education and training is easy and seems particularly attractive when you can't find a job. Unemployment, while considerably lower among people with higher degrees of education and training, has been creeping upwards. Until very recently people have been staying in school and applying for advanced degrees and training in record numbers, and the reason that's changed recently is that it's becoming obvious that there's an increasing unemployment and underemployment problem for highly trained and educated workers, and paying off those loans is becoming a lot more difficult.

Isolated anecdotes are completely useless in evaluating the national jobs market. Actual statistics don't support the claim of this story and are completely absent from this story, which considering that it's a foxnews story is no surprise at all. I'd provide the statistics but I figure if foxnews doesn't and people respond to it seriously without even bothering with google, why should I bother spending the time digging them up?

People need to do research before they choose their educational path and most kids don't/won't/never think of doing so.

Here's a local story here in Maine:

http://www.wgme.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/wgme_vid_9200.shtml?wap=0

There really are some decent jobs out there going unfilled and instead of useless "stimulus" all over the place, some targeted training opportunities would probably be much more useful.

Vocational Education needs to make a comeback at the high school level.

Be nice if the people hiring didn't insist on having years of experience. It makes getting a job without having had any internships basically impossible.

Something goes "clunk" when I read these stories. I saw one recently where companies said they have openings but can't fill them because they can't afford to hire people who can't hit the ground running. OK...do they need to fill those jobs or not? They don't seem to want to fill them that badly, if they can afford to wait for the "perfect" candidate that they won't have to train. Does anybody else see where I"m going with this? Like I said, it's not something I can put my finger on and I'm probably not expressing my reservations that well. It's just that my feeling is either you need new employees or you don't and if you don't why advertise them?