I've often thought that after a certain age, instead of getting some percent increase in salary, it would be preferable instead to work some percentage fewer days or hours. Seems like the idea is finally catching on. I hope I get to enjoy it when the time comes.
American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
31–40 of 98 posts
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#32Most of the really experienced people at companies I have worked for where surprised when I asked about what they did and why. They somehow assumed someone else was supposed to be training me. They were the only ones who knew answers to particular questions I had. They were shocked and sometimes didn't believe me that I asked everyone but them first. I don't blame these experienced workers for not sharing their knowl…
> Most companies seem to believe that knowledge transfer just happens magically,or should.
Put more experienced with less experienced workers working together and it does happen magically.
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#33> With 10,000 baby boomers turning 65 each day, businesses are scrambling to find ways to slow an exodus of the most experienced employees and ensure that they pass along their knowledge before they leave. Knowledge transfer should be baked into the day-to-day culture of work, not something desperately scrambled for during someone's last week. Those few companies with meaningful training and mentoring programs know t…
Can you give some examples of companies that do have good training and mentoring programs in tech?
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should be able to get one at this price if you go abroad.
If only there were a special government program to help me to import one at this price so I didn't have to pay so much for a local one...
Actually, there ain't one except that you'll have to pay fees/taxes on the importation, and probably some special checks/certifications to be able to put it on the road.
In the end, it's a lot of troubles and it may be more expensive than getting one locally.
[Note: I'm still talking about getting that car, the comparison with labour, if any, is purely accidental.]
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#35"A shortage of gen-x workers" is exactly the case at my facility. I'm 45, which is the valley in the bimodal age distribution. People are either in their 60's or 20's, and those two generations do not get along.
Why is there a shortage? Are you underpaying people?
Not me personally; I'm an EE, not a manager. But yes, they underpay. I'm only making market salary because I threatened to quit last spring.
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel it's a cycle of mistrust. Companies don't want to spend as much time training junior workers or apprentices because they often leave shortly after achieving proficiency. But this lack of perceived loyalty comes from a rational viewpoint. After the shift in business culture in the 80s, where workers were laid off in bulk even if the company was in good financial health, workers woke up to the new reality. (To b…
It's easy to keep people after training, just pay them more and avoid toxic environments. Companies don't do this because they make bank underpaying people and burning them out.
Companies don't make bank burning people out. Burning people out is a sign of organizational... corruption. There are more incompetent managers than competent ones, so you get things like this due to that.
In some, end-of-life organizations, burning people out can be a ... semi-rational decision, but .. it's an end-of-life company...
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#37Most of the really experienced people at companies I have worked for where surprised when I asked about what they did and why. They somehow assumed someone else was supposed to be training me. They were the only ones who knew answers to particular questions I had. They were shocked and sometimes didn't believe me that I asked everyone but them first. I don't blame these experienced workers for not sharing their knowl…
> Most companies seem to believe that knowledge transfer just happens magically,or should. Put more experienced with less experienced workers working together and it does happen magically.
I think in my case it did, I did learn from the experienced workers but that was apparently not the norm there. I hope you are right that that is what happens most places.
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#38> With 10,000 baby boomers turning 65 each day, businesses are scrambling to find ways to slow an exodus of the most experienced employees and ensure that they pass along their knowledge before they leave. Knowledge transfer should be baked into the day-to-day culture of work, not something desperately scrambled for during someone's last week. Those few companies with meaningful training and mentoring programs know t…
The new business model of efficiency at all costs means that hiring has been lean since the 90s.
At my employer, that means that the good senior people are in their 50s and 60s and retiring away, being replaced by 20-30 somethings. The people in their 40s are left behind as they got stuck in the middle too long.
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#39If salaries go up, shortages go down (both on silly and demand side)
Re: American Firms Want to Keep Older Workers a Bit Longer
#40> With 10,000 baby boomers turning 65 each day, businesses are scrambling to find ways to slow an exodus of the most experienced employees and ensure that they pass along their knowledge before they leave. Knowledge transfer should be baked into the day-to-day culture of work, not something desperately scrambled for during someone's last week. Those few companies with meaningful training and mentoring programs know t…
>Unless they're saying they literally can't find qualified GenX workers at any price- That is actually the truth for many niche skilled labor positions. Manufacturing plants are starving for a lack of experienced E&I (electronics and instrumentation) technicians but they can't even attract the next generation despite offering ~$25/hr to apprentices. Being an E&I tech in a chemical plant is a dirty job but not in a ba…
Interesting take. Most government positions are pretty flat as well, but come with decent incentive packages to make up for the perceived lower pay. For example; insurance, civil service rules, unions, pensions, stable working hours, etc.
Now let's talk about railroads, utility companies, and other "blue collar" work that requires an apprenticeship. First of all, layoffs happen quite often and seniority determines who is laid off. Not horrible and expected in a wide range of professions, but my neighbor is laid off way more often than I would be comfortable with (Union Pacific). Such is the ebbs and tides of business.
Then there is the rampant nepotism and other forms of preferential treatment to even get these jobs. To work for the Electric company, you had better know someone that is a respected IBEW member who will vouch for you. Same goes for the natural gas utility and just about all the people I know who work for utility companies in my city.
I say all that to say, these are still dead-end jobs unless you are lucky enough to pass the subjective management tests. Like you said, there is an upper limit on the wages you can earn without overtime. That sucks because you are going to absolutely destroy your body working most of these jobs. Why settle for that? The outcome is predetermined... additionally the work may be boring as shit after 10 years or so, then what?
If I had to do it all over again...