3 ms·

I'm trying to reconcile these two quotes: > a few good auto-glass installers, no experience necessary and, > commissioned a study of company shortages. Energ

by niftich 10y ago

I'm trying to reconcile these two quotes: > a few good auto-glass installers, no experience necessary and, > commissioned a study of company shortages. Energy, water, and land came up, but the No. 1 answer around the world was skilled labor Perhaps no experience is necessary for the auto-glass gig, but the metal stamping and machining? Are these all trades one can pick up on the job, by walking in from the street? Because if so, potential workers are leaving money on the table. More likely, they have stopped looking for work altogether. Unemployment is often discussed, but the Labor Participation Rate is less so, which fell greatly [1] after 2008. [1] http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000 http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

neaden 10y ago
The anecdote at the beginning of news articles is often meaningless, but people like hearing specific stories rather then trends in graphs so it's fairly de rigueur.
madengr 10y ago
For a machinist, generally not, as there is usually a formal training program, either company based or through community colleges. Though an enthusiastic person with good technical aptitude could definetly pick it up via on the job training.
zhivota 10y ago
Draw that graph back further before 2006 and you'll see that labor participation was lower from 1948-1984, almost 40 years. It appears to have peaked between 1990 and 2008, but even today it's not quite as low as it was during a time of pretty solid prosperity (50s and 60s). Even today's rate is only 3% or so lower than the 2006 rate, so if you add it to the unemployment rate it's still not very bad. Just another perspective on this as it seems to be something that comes up over and over in these discussions.
- madengr 10y ago
  I assume the low rate from 1948-84 was due to 1 person working in a married household. Then it increased as both persons worked to maintain middle class, followed by recession. So low labor participation with high prosperity back then, and low participation with low prosperity now.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

by niftich 10y ago

neaden 10y ago

The anecdote at the beginning of news articles is often meaningless, but people like hearing specific stories rather then trends in graphs so it's fairly de rigueur.

madengr 10y ago

For a machinist, generally not, as there is usually a formal training program, either company based or through community colleges. Though an enthusiastic person with good technical aptitude could definetly pick it up via on the job training.

zhivota 10y ago

Draw that graph back further before 2006 and you'll see that labor participation was lower from 1948-1984, almost 40 years. It appears to have peaked between 1990 and 2008, but even today it's not quite as low as it was during a time of pretty solid prosperity (50s and 60s). Even today's rate is only 3% or so lower than the 2006 rate, so if you add it to the unemployment rate it's still not very bad. Just another perspective on this as it seems to be something that comes up over and over in these discussions.

madengr 10y ago
I assume the low rate from 1948-84 was due to 1 person working in a married household. Then it increased as both persons worked to maintain middle class, followed by recession. So low labor participation with high prosperity back then, and low participation with low prosperity now.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]