Quomation is a terrible barometer for the strength of the technical workforce in
Utah. A simple check of their incredibly high turnover rate shows that much.
There's a reason they're rated an 'F' by the Better Business
Bureau. Throwing the figures "$80k - $90k" in their salary
range is laughable, and clearly only a PR stunt. If you do well there, you can
get the $35k mentioned as the "low end", which more realistically
represents the average salary there. Their drop-off in applicants has more to
do with their unwillingness to pay for talent. You can only abuse the potential
workforce so much before it comes back to bite you.I'd like to
see what REAL tech companies in the state have to say about their ability to
find qualified candidates. That would show if the conclusion stated in this
article was drawn BEFORE or AFTER analyzing/gathering evidence.
ow me to sum up the argument: If I can't entice a supermodel or a
Maserati, they should be imported/subsidized for me. What these
workers do requires uncommon talents, some amount of practice/training/schooling
and an intellect where average probably just barely cuts it. Yet, these
companies' inability to value them at more than the going rate nearly 20 years ago is somehow the fault of recent grads? On top of it, they expect
that subpar-paid worker to be exceptional. And just what message
does that send? "Be rare and special, just expect to get paid a communal
wage for it."
Study after independent study has confirmed our nation has an abundance of
citizens with the skills, education and intelligence for available jobs. Every
corporate meme from skilled labor shortage", "thousands of unfilled
jobs", "best and brightest" to "jobs Americans won't
do" is a PROVEN falsehood. And our universities are producing more STEM
graduates than US job growth -- as they have every year past, present and
future.Make no mistake; this is legislation about cheap labor,
profits and GREED. Even while our nation struggles with nearly 15% real
unemployment, falling wages and escalating poverty. Even while US wages stand
at record lows with corporate profits at six decade highs.And Sen.
Orrin Hatch? Call him Judas. He PERSONALLY stripped even minimal worker
protections. Corporations will have free reign to recruit and import foreign
"guest-workers" even as qualified citizens are bypassed and stand idle.
Indeed, in Hatch's world, corporations can directly replace their US
workforce with imported "guest workers" outside a 90 day window.This is NOT policy that serves our nation and citizens. And no one
should be deceived by the $2 BILLION that tech corporations are spending on
propaganda and "lobbying". And Hatch? He doesn't represent YOU.
Its not the government job to match jobs to student or education, it will always
never match and never has been a reliable way to create and education
curriculum. The state has no business to listen to business leaders,
business don't last long enough to absorb the students they train them to
match jobs.Eduction duty is to supply information and basics in
education for for any job and forget the serialized eduction for industrial
labor. This mismatch of education has destroyed everything a student
should know for any job, specialization is the responsibility of business not
our education system. Now we have a lot of handicapped young amerians who want a
job, but they don't have the basic education to learn any other jobs.
As a Computer Science Graduate I can tell you out of first hand that there have
been more and more people showing up at the career fair. In the department
there are less graduates based on the pictures of the graduating class. I would
attribute the lack of people in the industry to the lack of people that are
going into not just STEM, but Computer Science specifically. This may be
attributed to the dot com bubble that blew in 2001, and also may be attributed
to the fact that computer science may turn away people because of the
difficulty. It is an open major, but many people are attracted to other majors.
"Many of those who she has seen go through the Master's program are not
from the United States. That has many asking, why train people in U.S. colleges
and universities and then send them to other countries to become
competitors?"The answer is simple. When these highly trained
individuals go home to their own countries they are able to help improve local
economies, benefiting their people, including their own family and friends. As
other nations become less impoverished the pressure to leave those countries and
come here is reduced, and our problems with illegal immigration are reduced.To many of us this visa program appears to be a mechanism for holding
down wages. but if this is truly a world economy then it doesn't matter
where these workers are employed, they compete with US citizens either way. Is
it better to compete in a world economy of equals or to hold back other
nations' growth so that their people can better be exploited?
Also, what is wrong with a shortage of STEM workers, should that ever happen? If
the claim is that the USA is not producing enough STEM graduates, then nothing
better exists to change that than for a shortage of workers to happen - this
will raise wages, and college students will get excited for STEM careers and get
degrees in STEM.But I digress. There is no evidence that there is a
long-term shortage of STEM workers, and plenty of evidence suggests that there
might still be an over-supply of workers. Granted, there sometimes are spikes in
employment needs that might suggest a shortage, but recent history has proven
that those spikes don't last long. For example, tech layoffs and
announcements of tech layoffs in August were 3-times as high as previous months.
The government furloughs and shutdowns will also increase layoffs and
unemployment. Rather than betraying the American workers with yet another
colossal increase in "indentured servants" via the H-1B program,
let's put these unemployed American workers back to work. Not to mention,
that the indentured servant nature of the H-1B is an unfair advantage that works
against US workers.
Many of these companies that claim there are desperate shortages of STEM workers
are unwilling to hire older, more experienced candidates. The top two excuses
are the following:1) they cost too much2) their skills are not
up to dateThe rebuttal to 1) is that if there truly is a shortage of
workers, then older workers would get hired. It makes no sense to stop a project
that has funding just because an older, more experienced worker is the only one
available to do the job. When older workers have a low unemployment rate, I
might buy the claim of a STEM shortage. But that is not the case, since
employers are able to find younger workers, and hence there is no shortage of
workers.The rebuttal to 2) is obvious: older workers are just as
skilled as younger workers, and frequently more so given their vast knowledge
and experience. Rarely are university computer science programs more up to date
than industry, and thus younger workers just out of school are not more skilled.
Also, older workers are working for the same organizations as younger workers,
thus their skills are comparable. The shortage is just a myth.
It seems to me the reason there are "mixed results" is because there are
a LOT of candidates, but not so many highly skilled candidates. In my
expierience I've seen a lot of people who can write code, but a lot fewer
that are passionate about it, that continue to learn and stay up on the latest,
and have a firm grasp on the concepts of computer science. Unfortunately, more
companies are looking for the ones that really know what they're doing, not
the ones that just get by.While there's a lot of supply, in a
sense, there's also a shortage of supply of the type of candidate companies
are really after.