Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
1–10 of 133 posts
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#2It seems to me the title would have been better named "Why reskilling will probably not guarantee you a new job". The first two thirds of the article about how and why this doesn't happen, and it sums up with what appears to be the exception.
That said, I couldn't agree with the closing more: "You've got to work so hard at it and do all these extra activities and just immerse yourself fully. Without that passion, I can't see them getting anywhere." Trying to gain new skills with the mindset that it's a burden does not pan out. Instead, finding a topic that has lots of natural interest yields the best results, and is way more fun!
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#3They bury the lede: "In reality, employers report difficulty hiring because the wages they offer don’t match the skills they’re after, she says"
Also: "In a 2018 paper, he and colleagues showed that only about 60 to 70% of US computing and engineering graduates land jobs in STEM, dropping to between 10 and 50% for those studying life sciences, physical sciences and maths."
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#4Some of the people they are talking to here have just done 3 month courses. They are competing against people who have 4+ year degrees and people with more experience. They are going to have to build up their resumes with smaller things whether its a project of their own or small jobs for other people.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#5Why does everyone always suggest coding as an alternative career path? Why not laying floor tiles???
I have more than 5 years of experience as a developer and am unemployed, so I'm currently finishing my degree, which will take at least another 6 months.
Some day I will smack someone who says that they can't find developers, honest to God.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#6They bury the lede: "In reality, employers report difficulty hiring because the wages they offer don’t match the skills they’re after, she says" Also: "In a 2018 paper, he and colleagues showed that only about 60 to 70% of US computing and engineering graduates land jobs in STEM, dropping to between 10 and 50% for those studying life sciences, physical sciences and maths."
In reality, employers report difficulty hiring because the wages they offer don’t match the skills they’re after, she says
AND
only about 60 to 70% of US computing and engineering graduates land jobs in STEM
I don't know man?
The implication there is that there exist up to 30-40% of new computing and engineering grads who on the one hand are without jobs in STEM, and on the other are willing to leave the STEM jobs that offer lower wages on the table.
It's been decades since I was a new STEM grad, but I still remember being a new grad. Only my opinion, but I feel something else must be going on.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#7On a related note changing tech stacks and industries is hugely more difficult than I expected. I started in C++ in a steel company and moving to Java with Financial services was so different it was like starting from scratch. Now I'm trying to move more JS/Python in tech land and again its much harder than I expected just to get basic tooling, workflow done, let alone trying to get someone to hire you.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#8The biggest thing from the employer side is that the cost of a single bad hire can be potentially enormous. This is a combination of legal (threat of wrongful termination lawsuits, COBRA) and cultural (nobody likes to feel like a jerk boss, morale problems among the remaining employees). The rule of thumb among managers is don't hire anybody unless you're 90% sure they'll work out for at least a year.
That creates a major roadblock for entry-level employees. No matter how much formal training somebody's had, they've still never actually performed the role before. That makes it substantially riskier that they won't fit. Even just a couple years of experience is a credible signal that the person has basic competence in the actual job.
What we need is another category of transitional employment, with both much lighter regulatory barriers to turnover as well as more relaxed cultural expectations about job security. In the olden days we'd call this an "apprentice". Today it might be an "intern", but the general expectation is that only applies to very young workers- not those reskilling to make a lateral move.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#9They bury the lede: "In reality, employers report difficulty hiring because the wages they offer don’t match the skills they’re after, she says" Also: "In a 2018 paper, he and colleagues showed that only about 60 to 70% of US computing and engineering graduates land jobs in STEM, dropping to between 10 and 50% for those studying life sciences, physical sciences and maths."
In reality, employers report difficulty hiring because the wages they offer don’t match the skills they’re after, she says AND only about 60 to 70% of US computing and engineering graduates land jobs in STEM I don't know man? The implication there is that there exist up to 30-40% of new computing and engineering grads who on the one hand are without jobs in STEM, and on the other are willing to leave the STEM jobs th…
There are good paying jobs outside STEM. Finance, consulting, media, law (especially IP law if you have a bachelors in STEM), etc.
If an engineering grad decides to become an actuary or management consultant or investment banker, that doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't find a STEM job.
Re: Why reskilling won’t always guarantee you a new job
#10The biggest thing from the employer side is that the cost of a single bad hire can be potentially enormous. This is a combination of legal (threat of wrongful termination lawsuits, COBRA) and cultural (nobody likes to feel like a jerk boss, morale problems among the remaining employees). The rule of thumb among managers is don't hire anybody unless you're 90% sure they'll work out for at least a year. That creates a…
The concept of the apprentice has come back into vogue here in the UK. It doesn't work eveywhere, but I know a couple of firms who bring in cohorts of apprentices in the same way they do with graduates. They use a local company to do the first few months of training and then have a continuous development programme.
A friend is a senior manager at one of them and he loves it, he's been really impressed with the calibre of the apprentices and how quickly they've picked things up.