3 ms·

This quote from the parent comment made me sad because it is true. With that being said, why is this so? Is it because the internet learning makes it possible t

This quote from the parent comment made me sad because it is true. With that being said, why is this so? Is it because the internet learning makes it possible to not need training classes to learn a language like you once did? Would the poster's mother prefer a week long off site course led by instructor or going through learnadacore.com (or whatever) at her own pace?

Jtsummers 8y ago
Companies used to invest in their workers, there was an assumption (reasonably accurate for many employers and employees) that people would remain with a company for decades. It was to their benefit to train and improve the employees (NB: Layoffs and other things still happened, not claiming this was a golden age, just different). At some point (1980s and 1990s in particular) things like retirement benefits started disappearing, replaced by 401k contributions and the like. Employees started moving more between companies so that long-term investment in employees became a problem. If I'm an employer and I spend 3 years getting you the equivalent of a graduate degree in software engineering (training on best practices, training in languages and design, attending conferences) and then you move, I have nothing to show for my effort. You could add clauses requiring people to work for some period of time after receiving specific kind of training (like if you pay them for a degree) or requiring them to reimburse you if they leave early. But you can't do that for everything. So companies have assumed that employees are mercenaries, and employees have become mercenaries. In the end, we still work 40+ hour weeks, but get worse compensation and companies refuse to invest in us.
- tomcam 8y ago
  All true, but omits the change in the litigation climate here in the States. Dealing with pernicious, baseless lawsuits taught me never to hire employees again.
jcadam 8y ago
Training on your own time after hours vs being paid to attend training during your regular work hours? I know which one I'd choose.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- 4thaccount 8y ago
  I meant online training AT Work lol.

Jtsummers 8y ago

Companies used to invest in their workers, there was an assumption (reasonably accurate for many employers and employees) that people would remain with a company for decades. It was to their benefit to train and improve the employees (NB: Layoffs and other things still happened, not claiming this was a golden age, just different). At some point (1980s and 1990s in particular) things like retirement benefits started disappearing, replaced by 401k contributions and the like. Employees started moving more between companies so that long-term investment in employees became a problem. If I'm an employer and I spend 3 years getting you the equivalent of a graduate degree in software engineering (training on best practices, training in languages and design, attending conferences) and then you move, I have nothing to show for my effort. You could add clauses requiring people to work for some period of time after receiving specific kind of training (like if you pay them for a degree) or requiring them to reimburse you if they leave early. But you can't do that for everything. So companies have assumed that employees are mercenaries, and employees have become mercenaries. In the end, we still work 40+ hour weeks, but get worse compensation and companies refuse to invest in us.

tomcam 8y ago
All true, but omits the change in the litigation climate here in the States. Dealing with pernicious, baseless lawsuits taught me never to hire employees again.

jcadam 8y ago

Training on your own time after hours vs being paid to attend training during your regular work hours? I know which one I'd choose.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
4thaccount 8y ago
I meant online training AT Work lol.