5 ms·

Someone I know well, who owns an engineering company, used to be a big proponent of this but has soured on it. It absolutely is possible for people to learn co

Someone I know well, who owns an engineering company, used to be a big proponent of this but has soured on it. It absolutely is possible for people to learn complex technical skills (like mechanical or software engineering) in a professional setting. The problem is that the trainees are mostly dead weight for an extended period of time. The employers who hire them need confidence that the trainees will remain with them for long enough to provide a payoff for the initial investment. If the trainees can just leave whenever they feel like it (my friend's experience), the whole thing is a waste of time and money. I'd be interested to know how this is handled in countries where apprenticeships are more common. There must be some combination of legal and cultural restraints on trainees bailing after the employers have invested in them.

saber6 7y ago
Flipside: I've encountered numerous employers (bosses) that don't seem to understand the concept of market value. If you take someone worth X(1) and train them up to be worth X(5) on the standard market, but then pay them somewhere between X(2) and X(3), don't be surprised when common sense prevails -- eg the person realizes they can get 25%+ pay raise by walking across the street, and does so.
crispyambulance 7y ago
> If the trainees can just leave whenever they feel like it (my friend's experience), the whole thing is a waste of time and money. OK, but if you think about it optimistically, it ALSO means that you're able to hire folks that have trained at and left other places.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- 015UUZn8aEvW 7y ago
  Yes, but only if it's a common practice. Doesn't work if you're an early adopter.
snoman 7y ago
It's very beneficial for a nation to have a skilled workforce and so funding from the top via something like this, is the general idea: https://www.dol.gov/featured/apprenticeship/grants https://www.dol.gov/featured/apprenticeship/grants That is to say, the nation benefits, the government offsets much of the burden from the master, and the industry can still be competitive to attract (or retain, in the case of the master) the trained talent.
nradov 7y ago
The usual approach is some sort of deferred compensation scheme where the employer promises the trainee a bonus payment if they successfully complete training and then stay on for a couple years afterwards.
- watwut 7y ago
  This is mass scale means massive taking of advantage of young people for whom being taken advantage off is the only way to industry.
  - triceratops 7y ago
    How? Backloaded compensation is pretty common in many industries that in the . The employee gets training and experience, the employer has the security of knowing their investment will have some return. It's a win-win.
    - watwut 7y ago
      The moment you have sociopathic boss, you are still locked in that workplace. In fact, normal people willing to take maximum advantage of student are at advantage due to inability to negotiate or leave - whether through hours worked or the kind of work you do. These people would be great for tasks that need to be done, teach a little and professionals don't want to do them due to them being dead end. As of now, your ultimate possibility is to leave and bad workplaces have large turnover. Good workplaces have small turnover.
skadamou 7y ago
If the company doing the training pays their trained employees a competitive wage and promotes a positive company culture than they really shouldn't be too worried about losing employees once the apprenticeship is finished. IMO people job hop mostly because of poor leadership (ie poor direct management or poor company culture) or because their current company wages fail to keep pace with industry standards.
- hinkley 7y ago
  From my knothole it seems like people generally leave when they have learned all they can. They'll leave anyway, but I believe I've had better luck holding onto teammates longer when they got to continue padding their resume. The safer you feel about your employability, the less anxious you are to test it.
- austhrow743 7y ago
  If they're paying a competitive wage then they're losing out compared to companies that just pay competitively and don't have the cost of training up apprentices.
hinkley 7y ago
It always seems to me like the people who talk the loudest about 'dead weight' have a lot of employees who can't or won't detail how things work and are meant to work. Seeing my code and processes through the lens of a beginner helps me improve my code and documentation. Seeing their code through the lens of a beginner helps some other people fluff their egos. You don't really notice the difference until you get a chance to grow your company fairly rapidly, and even then some bosses misinterpret the people who hoard knowledge as their most trusted lieutenants instead of the boat anchor dragging them down. See also teams who "can't find good people". Either your bosses aren't offering enough money, or you have shut the door behind you and you're trying to find people who made it through that door somewhere else. You should be mostly looking for people who can learn, instead of people who already have.

saber6 7y ago

Flipside: I've encountered numerous employers (bosses) that don't seem to understand the concept of market value. If you take someone worth X(1) and train them up to be worth X(5) on the standard market, but then pay them somewhere between X(2) and X(3), don't be surprised when common sense prevails -- eg the person realizes they can get 25%+ pay raise by walking across the street, and does so.

crispyambulance 7y ago

> If the trainees can just leave whenever they feel like it (my friend's experience), the whole thing is a waste of time and money. OK, but if you think about it optimistically, it ALSO means that you're able to hire folks that have trained at and left other places.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
015UUZn8aEvW 7y ago
Yes, but only if it's a common practice. Doesn't work if you're an early adopter.

snoman 7y ago

It's very beneficial for a nation to have a skilled workforce and so funding from the top via something like this, is the general idea: https://www.dol.gov/featured/apprenticeship/grants https://www.dol.gov/featured/apprenticeship/grants That is to say, the nation benefits, the government offsets much of the burden from the master, and the industry can still be competitive to attract (or retain, in the case of the master) the trained talent.

nradov 7y ago

The usual approach is some sort of deferred compensation scheme where the employer promises the trainee a bonus payment if they successfully complete training and then stay on for a couple years afterwards.

watwut 7y ago
This is mass scale means massive taking of advantage of young people for whom being taken advantage off is the only way to industry.
- triceratops 7y ago
  How? Backloaded compensation is pretty common in many industries that in the . The employee gets training and experience, the employer has the security of knowing their investment will have some return. It's a win-win.
  - watwut 7y ago
    The moment you have sociopathic boss, you are still locked in that workplace. In fact, normal people willing to take maximum advantage of student are at advantage due to inability to negotiate or leave - whether through hours worked or the kind of work you do. These people would be great for tasks that need to be done, teach a little and professionals don't want to do them due to them being dead end. As of now, your ultimate possibility is to leave and bad workplaces have large turnover. Good workplaces have small turnover.

skadamou 7y ago

If the company doing the training pays their trained employees a competitive wage and promotes a positive company culture than they really shouldn't be too worried about losing employees once the apprenticeship is finished. IMO people job hop mostly because of poor leadership (ie poor direct management or poor company culture) or because their current company wages fail to keep pace with industry standards.

hinkley 7y ago
From my knothole it seems like people generally leave when they have learned all they can. They'll leave anyway, but I believe I've had better luck holding onto teammates longer when they got to continue padding their resume. The safer you feel about your employability, the less anxious you are to test it.
austhrow743 7y ago
If they're paying a competitive wage then they're losing out compared to companies that just pay competitively and don't have the cost of training up apprentices.

hinkley 7y ago

It always seems to me like the people who talk the loudest about 'dead weight' have a lot of employees who can't or won't detail how things work and are meant to work. Seeing my code and processes through the lens of a beginner helps me improve my code and documentation. Seeing their code through the lens of a beginner helps some other people fluff their egos. You don't really notice the difference until you get a chance to grow your company fairly rapidly, and even then some bosses misinterpret the people who hoard knowledge as their most trusted lieutenants instead of the boat anchor dragging them down. See also teams who "can't find good people". Either your bosses aren't offering enough money, or you have shut the door behind you and you're trying to find people who made it through that door somewhere else. You should be mostly looking for people who can learn, instead of people who already have.