4 ms·

Corporations, especially not giant entrenched monopolies like railroads, don't actually support the free market. They pay lip service to free market ideals whe

by na85 5y ago

Corporations, especially not giant entrenched monopolies like railroads, don't actually support the free market. They pay lip service to free market ideals when it's beneficial to do so, but as soon as the free market means they need to pay more for labor, well, they offshore what they can and then complain of a skills gap or a labor gap. It's actually just a "5 years experience university educated and willing to work for peanuts" shortage.

aledalgrande 5y ago
They might not believe in it, but the market doesn't care about it. When it tilts on the workers side like now, for the sheer number of available jobs, companies have to adapt. When there is a job shortage, workers have to adapt.
MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
I have to laugh at these too. Prior to coming into CS, I did a lot of general labor. I couldn't get machinist jobs or general blue collar labor jobs even though the positions said "willing to train." None gave me the time of day. On top of that, higher paying (compared to most) general labor factory jobs wouldn't even set up interviews. I'm pretty sure I didn't get picked for one job just because I asked what "swing shift" was. A lot of these companies are liars masquerading as if they can't find people. There are people who are applying, but HR is choosier than most even in the CS field. I really don't get it. Also, many factories do shady garbage where you go through temp-to-hire agencies, promising getting hired on after 90-120 days, then hold you on the leash for 12 months and not hire you. All these companies can suck it. They absolutely deserve the "shortage" they've created. Most people end up wanting to go to retail or get a degree because they're sick of being treated like a literal personal labor slave who honestly is more likely to be fired on a whim than the average office worker. General labor working conditions are at rock bottom. We traded excessive safety for being treated like robots. Ever tried talking to someone for fun at a factory full of temp-to-hires? You don't exactly get to know anybody. So the system is devised to treat you as a robot. If robot-38273 does not perform, decommission them and get a new robot.
- eru 5y ago
  > There are people who are applying, but HR is choosier than most even in the CS field. CS field has been famously short on labour for decades. Wouldn't we expect them to be less choosy?
  - MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
    Imagine passing a drug test, having two years of general labor experience, and telling the company you're willing to work overtime and then not get hired. That is the level of pettiness general labor jobs are at. I've had several interviews and never had a drug addiction, willing to work for damn peanuts and they still wouldn't give me a job. I'm not saying I was a perfect candidate, but for real, getting a general labor was way harder than it was to do white collar jobs. Companies just don't hire anybody at those salaries. Then they complain when they only get people who can't pass a drug test. Yeah cause they quite literally are the only people in the world willing to put up with your BS as an employer right now. Or the best part, these companies are in garbage cities nobody wants to live in anymore. I'm sorry, but a single walmart and 5 fast food restaurants does not make a desirable place to live.
    - eru 5y ago
      Yes. And my point was that companies hiring programmers put up with much more bullshit from the likes of me, because they have to, if they want to hire enough people. Programmers are coddled. I have never had to do a drug test for work (though I never worked in the US). And most of people in software that I know would avoid places where they would have to take a drug test, just out of general principle. (Unless the money was really good, of course.) Workers in most other industries have it much, much harder. Just as you describe!
- kiawe_fire 5y ago
  I’ve experienced this earlier in my career. An economy in which there are a large number of job openings, with fair pay, that are in such legitimate demand that they offer training and other incentives, AND receive a sufficient number of capable applicants, yet never end up being filled. It’s not that the positions aren’t really needed, or that the job listings are an excuse to hire cheaper, less qualified labor. The jobs just go unfulfilled, and actual business opportunities get left behind. I don’t get it, but it’s a real phenomenon that doesn’t get enough attention.
eru 5y ago
> Corporations, especially not giant entrenched monopolies like railroads, don't actually support the free market. That's the beauty of a free market: it works even if the participants don't support it. Competition forces people to do the Right Thing. Alas, enough people need to support free markets politically, otherwise it gets eroded over time.
- SantalBlush 5y ago
  Competition is not a given in a free market. As we're seeing now, big players can just buy up their would-be competitors.
  - eru 5y ago
    Buying up your would-be competitors just gives people great incentives to found many more would-be competitors.
    - SantalBlush 5y ago
      Okay, but calling that competition would be incorrect.
      - eru 5y ago
        What do you mean?
- na85 5y ago
  >That's the beauty of a free market: it works even if the participants don't support it. Actually, that's the beauty of a well-regulated market. Entrenched monopolies don't compete; they collude. See for example the Canadian telecom market which is under-regulated and thoroughly corrupt.
  - eru 5y ago
    It's probably misregulated, not so much under-regulated. It's really hard to keep up a monopoly without legal protection.

by na85 5y ago

aledalgrande 5y ago

They might not believe in it, but the market doesn't care about it. When it tilts on the workers side like now, for the sheer number of available jobs, companies have to adapt. When there is a job shortage, workers have to adapt.

MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago

I have to laugh at these too. Prior to coming into CS, I did a lot of general labor. I couldn't get machinist jobs or general blue collar labor jobs even though the positions said "willing to train." None gave me the time of day. On top of that, higher paying (compared to most) general labor factory jobs wouldn't even set up interviews. I'm pretty sure I didn't get picked for one job just because I asked what "swing shift" was. A lot of these companies are liars masquerading as if they can't find people. There are people who are applying, but HR is choosier than most even in the CS field. I really don't get it. Also, many factories do shady garbage where you go through temp-to-hire agencies, promising getting hired on after 90-120 days, then hold you on the leash for 12 months and not hire you. All these companies can suck it. They absolutely deserve the "shortage" they've created. Most people end up wanting to go to retail or get a degree because they're sick of being treated like a literal personal labor slave who honestly is more likely to be fired on a whim than the average office worker. General labor working conditions are at rock bottom. We traded excessive safety for being treated like robots. Ever tried talking to someone for fun at a factory full of temp-to-hires? You don't exactly get to know anybody. So the system is devised to treat you as a robot. If robot-38273 does not perform, decommission them and get a new robot.

eru 5y ago
> There are people who are applying, but HR is choosier than most even in the CS field. CS field has been famously short on labour for decades. Wouldn't we expect them to be less choosy?
- MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
  Imagine passing a drug test, having two years of general labor experience, and telling the company you're willing to work overtime and then not get hired. That is the level of pettiness general labor jobs are at. I've had several interviews and never had a drug addiction, willing to work for damn peanuts and they still wouldn't give me a job. I'm not saying I was a perfect candidate, but for real, getting a general labor was way harder than it was to do white collar jobs. Companies just don't hire anybody at those salaries. Then they complain when they only get people who can't pass a drug test. Yeah cause they quite literally are the only people in the world willing to put up with your BS as an employer right now. Or the best part, these companies are in garbage cities nobody wants to live in anymore. I'm sorry, but a single walmart and 5 fast food restaurants does not make a desirable place to live.
  - eru 5y ago
    Yes. And my point was that companies hiring programmers put up with much more bullshit from the likes of me, because they have to, if they want to hire enough people. Programmers are coddled. I have never had to do a drug test for work (though I never worked in the US). And most of people in software that I know would avoid places where they would have to take a drug test, just out of general principle. (Unless the money was really good, of course.) Workers in most other industries have it much, much harder. Just as you describe!
kiawe_fire 5y ago
I’ve experienced this earlier in my career. An economy in which there are a large number of job openings, with fair pay, that are in such legitimate demand that they offer training and other incentives, AND receive a sufficient number of capable applicants, yet never end up being filled. It’s not that the positions aren’t really needed, or that the job listings are an excuse to hire cheaper, less qualified labor. The jobs just go unfulfilled, and actual business opportunities get left behind. I don’t get it, but it’s a real phenomenon that doesn’t get enough attention.

eru 5y ago

> Corporations, especially not giant entrenched monopolies like railroads, don't actually support the free market. That's the beauty of a free market: it works even if the participants don't support it. Competition forces people to do the Right Thing. Alas, enough people need to support free markets politically, otherwise it gets eroded over time.

SantalBlush 5y ago
Competition is not a given in a free market. As we're seeing now, big players can just buy up their would-be competitors.
- eru 5y ago
  Buying up your would-be competitors just gives people great incentives to found many more would-be competitors.
  - SantalBlush 5y ago
    Okay, but calling that competition would be incorrect.
    - eru 5y ago
      What do you mean?
na85 5y ago
>That's the beauty of a free market: it works even if the participants don't support it. Actually, that's the beauty of a well-regulated market. Entrenched monopolies don't compete; they collude. See for example the Canadian telecom market which is under-regulated and thoroughly corrupt.
- eru 5y ago
  It's probably misregulated, not so much under-regulated. It's really hard to keep up a monopoly without legal protection.