re: Study Finds American Millennials To Be Some Of The World's Least Skilled People

Thank you for posting an example of a company that does it differently. But across the board, that is not the norm in today's enviroment

quote:

---

You need to go over to the Firday .gif thread. You missed hitting my post there.

---

Huh? Ill look for it, hopefully it is worth my time.

quote:

---

That's anecdotal evidence and it may be an outlier. The aggregated evidence and all the advice out there suggests what he is saying is true. Loyalty gets you little, putting your skills on the market gets you more.

---

Caterpillar operates in the same manner. Hire young people in at entry level positions and then let them learn the ropes and work their way up.

Most don't

quote:

---

Students have been sitting in classrooms a lot longer than just the past 100 years.

---

I never said they didn't. Classroom dynamics, demographics, and pedagogy have changed tremendously throughout history. It wasn't until much more recently that our education system has evolved into a mass produced cookie cutter model that expects to educate all children in the same way. Because of this, standards have been watered down to meet the needs of children with a broader range of intellectual ability and learning style.

The higher education system, for example, has sought to standardize each field of study. This has promoted less hands on experienced based learning, and more classroom study built around a standardized test. For example, attorneys used to complete an apprenticeship, not law school, for several years before being able to sit for the bar.

I will point out that some fields such as engineering, law, and medicine do have different forms of internships either readily available or built into their educational system. Regardless, this happens much later in life. Teenagers should be exposed to more internship or vocational opportunities in high school. It would promote the fostering of skills, and help to confirm interest in an actual job before devoting to years of study.

quote:

---

Then you find the ones that do.

---

They are fading.

The big problem is that the Boomer run large companies have decided to cut costs in training and not development talent like they used to. They do not invest in their employees, so why should their employees invest in them? They expect colleges to train people for jobs, ignoring the fact that colleges are not "job training" centers, and then complain, see this OP and article, when colleges don't spit out "skilled workers." And as parents, all they did was push "College, College, College," as the way to unlock this path.

This situation has created a large force of highly-college educated, but low skill workers who expect and will only take a certain kind of work, trying to apply to jobs at companies who expect them to have the exact credentials necessary for the work, while not planning to train, improve, or develop them as employees. They only rely on the credential as a value on that person's work. HARD WORK DOES NOT MATTER. It's a complete mismatch of input and output that's created and force-fed by the Boomers and how they operate.

Boomers: "Go to college first so we don't have to train you, go work somewhere else to get "experience," whatever the heck that means, then apply to work for us. Then you can have a low-paying job and try to work your way up to the top. We'll let someone else do all of the work building you up, all the while not leaving our positions so there's zero upward mobility. Until we die. And we're going to last as long as possible. Oh and here's the bill for taking care of us, worry about your own retirement later because Social Security is all ours. kthanxbye"
That's the way it is.

Newer tech-focused and SaaS companies have created a near opposite situation where they often don't expect people with the exact degree, they build FOR loyalty, but don't plan for it, and focus on talent hiring and curation. If you can get there, you're lucky.

It takes forever to get promoted within a company. It takes a couple of weeks to get a higher position when you move companies. Every company in the world, from MNCs to small, local places, bitches about not having guys to replace the old guard that are retiring. The problem is that they do have those people, but they aren't willing to hire and train them.

Coming out of LSU with a forestry degree, every single company we talked to said they desperately needed new people. When we graduated and actually applied for all of those jobs, they all required a minimum of 5 years experience. I actually chewed a CEO out over that problem.

They really do look for a variety of experience over consistently staying at one job. Unless it is a higher level position, my guess is that they think you aren't motivated and are complacent.

The best way to move up nowadays is to switch companies every couple of years. Start small and just keep jumping around until you get to where you want to be. I personally don't like it, but if you're gonna hold me back, I'm walking.




For those talking about Caterpillar....the only way you'll get promoted inside the company is if someone leaves or dies. You don't get promoted for doing a good job. You could be better than your boss, but you won't get there until he leaves

quote:

---

am glad my company isn't like that. I guess there is a reason it is the #1 jet leader. Imagine the fact that they actively promote from within and actually encourage upward movement. I guess this company just isn't with the times.

---

Guess the world's largest manufacturer of earth moving equipment is just out of date and fading away as well. They're only worth about $60,000,000,000 give or take a few million here or there. They'll be turning out the lights any day now I suppose.

quote:

---

U.S. adults ages 16-34 are the worst, or nearly the worst, at a variety of professional skills when compared to their counterparts in 22 countries, a new study reveals.

---

Adults 16-34 were born in 1981 and 1999, respectively. These two dates loosely correspond to recessions beginning in 1980 and 2001.

Regan was president from 1981-1989 and Bush from 2001-2009. Both of these presidents were weak on educational policies. If you factor in the time lag for the erosion of their respective education systems, the millennials probably have a shitty chance to succeed.

I'm sure there are plenty of other factors ... sending more jobs offshore, more economic downturns, advances in computers lessening certain job markets, newer more powerful drugs to further erode a segment of society.

It's hard to speak in generalities and just come up with THE cause for the downturn of a particular generation, but I'm pretty sure they were on the receiving end, and you can expect more of the same in the future. Also, don't expect this problem to correct itself.

Oh, glad we cleared that up.