4 ms·
"if a business invests $20k in training and $80k in salary, there is nothing stopping another employer from offering $90k in salary after training is complete"
by VLM 11y ago
"if a business invests $20k in training and $80k in salary, there is nothing stopping another employer from offering $90k in salary after training is complete"
Doesn't this assume a lifestyle from several generations ago where you get "the training" then you're set for the rest of your working life? I don't think the real world has worked like that since at least the 70s.
If I took that $90K job I'd be OK while I'm there... thats what, on average just a couple years? Then I'd be dead in the water and have some explaining to do at the interview for the next $80K job that provides the entry level training I'd need. Why would any employer hire an untrained employee if there's a perfectly well trained employee from the $80K job? Meanwhile the guy who stayed at the $80K job likely got a promotion to $100K and here I am trying to get in at the ground floor yet again.
How this fits in with stereotypical OTJ training is a mystery. Most formal training is a way to shovel money to middlemen who provide it in an accelerated format for an extremely large fee. Most real world training is "here's a PC with a web browser and your bosses bosses boss declared the due date for the project is next month, now figure it out yourself".
Think of the last time you worked a project with a junk spec that has no relationship with reality. Those people who can't spec a fizzbuzz if their life depended on it are the ones specifying the required training. I wonder if that training spec will be worth the paper its printed on?
- notahacker 11y agoIf I've got a specific skill or qualification that's increased my market value to $90k, I'm not really sure why I'd be reduced to applying for entry level jobs and requiring training again in two years time? And there's a huge spectrum of on the job training, from pointless classroom exercises to tick company compliance boxes to highly expensive professional qualifications that might pay for themselves in two years if the firm can hang onto the employee and bill for their time, but also make it much easier for the employee to get a better offer. It's the latter type that costs firms the most money as well as benefits candidates the most.
- jdmichal 11y ago> If I've got a specific skill or qualification that's increased my market value to $90k, I'm not really sure why I'd be reduced to applying for entry level jobs and requiring training again in two years time? In other news, the huge demand for people who could efficiently work a loom has slacked greatly since the industrial revolution. (A snarky way of saying, training and the benefits and value it confers is a function over time. Especially in the current world of web-based software development, two years can be a very large amount of time.)
- notahacker 11y agoSure, but in anything resembling a competitive market I can't see any reason to believe a newly-acquired skill will hold its value less well in future if I move to a new company offering a higher salary because of it, as in the scenario proposed above.