It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Great job openings, no candidates.

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Hiring managers struggle to find employees, even as millions of jobs seekers are desperate for work


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Despite millions of unemployed job seekers desperate for work, many open positions are languishing unfilled. The reason? Not enough candidates.

With job openings largely concentrated in specialized industries like health care, green technology and energy, some employers say the problem is finding qualified workers, which are in short supply. Meanwhile, they are inundated with eager candidates from other industries who lack the skills and experience that the job requires.

According to a recent survey by Human Capital Institute and TheLadders, more than half of employers said "quality of candidates" or "availability of candidates" are their greatest challenges -- despite the recession.

Mary Willoughby, the director of human resources at the Center for Disability Rights in Rochester, New York, has been trying to hire registered nurses, home health aides and service coordinators for several of the agencies that she oversees.

Many of the positions, which require specific skills and offer salaries in the range of $30,000 to $45,000, have been vacant for six months or longer.

The job postings, which appear on CareerBuilder, Craigslist and some regional sites, garner a lot of attention, she says. "We get tons of résumés from people. We are just not getting highly qualified candidates."

The problem, according to Willoughby, is that they are bombarded by résumés from job seekers without the two years or more of health care experience necessary. "We're seeing a lot of people trying to break into the health care arena," she said.

As a result, human resources spends too much time sifting through résumés for people who aren't remotely qualified, and can't find many that are. "We've gotten close to 300 résumés for a service coordinator position. Out of that we brought in four people," she said.

Those that didn't make the cut included someone with previous experience as an office clerk and a job applicant with a bachelor's in mathematics, currently employed at a café.

Willoughby recently instituted a hiring incentive program to encourage existing employees to refer viable candidates. Those responsible for bringing in new hires are eligible to receive $2,500 to $5,000, depending on the position. She has also added in a signing bonus for the new employees.

Things are even worse on the higher end of the pay scale. At wireless leasing firm, Unison Site, a position for director of lead generation, which pays $90,000-$140,000, has been open for three months, with no candidates in sight.

"With the job market the way it is, we should be able to recruit really good people and it hasn't worked quite as well as we wanted," said Joe Songer, co-founder and chief financial officer. "My problem is when I put an ad out I just get bombarded with people that aren't qualified."


Source

The rest of the article can be found above.

I am a little shocked by this, but then again not so much. A lot of vacant jobs requiring highly skilled workers are vacant at the moment. Does this point to the fact that those who are unemployed right now are the "less" skilled workforce of America?

What do you all think of this development? Is it a problem with our education system? Or just a lack of minimum wage esque jobs which is keeping the unemployment rate so high?

~Keeper




posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Does this point to the fact that those who are unemployed right now are the "less" skilled workforce of America?


Not necessarily, IMO. There are highly skilled people out there who just don't have the skills currently needed by open positions.

Bureau of Labor Statistics


Construction 16%
Education and Health Svcs 6%
Financial 7%
Information 11.2%
Leisure and Hospitality 11.4%
Manufacturing 11.9%
Professional & Business Services 11.3%


It's more a situation of the people out of work being in an industry hit hard. They may be highly skilled, but their skills don't translate to where the openings are.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
In many cases, there is a qualified individual for the job...but the job means relocation...which means (if you are married) that your spouse must also find employment in the location of the job opening...or else, one is right back where they started...with a one income household.

Just my 2-cents



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


That's a great point, I had not thought of that one. I guess it would be difficult for both parties to find sustainable employment in any state that has been hit hard by the recession.

For the poster above, thank you for the statistics.

~Keeper



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


That's a great point, I had not thought of that one. I guess it would be difficult for both parties to find sustainable employment in any state that has been hit hard by the recession.

For the poster above, thank you for the statistics.

~Keeper



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
3 (or 4, if you count 'The") frigging words: ON. The. JOB. TRAINING. Damn lazy, cheap industries... They think the right person's gonna magically walk in?

Edited, because I cant COUNT. No, I'm not related to Paris....




[edit on 3-11-2009 by wylekat]



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

The problem, according to Willoughby, is that they are bombarded by résumés from job seekers without the two years or more of health care experience necessary. "We're seeing a lot of people trying to break into the health care arena," she said.



I had to move across the state for the one job that was in my field of whom were actually hiring people out of school.

I used to get ANGRY for the two years I was looking because HOW THE HELL DO THEY EXPECT PEOPLE TO GET THE QUALITY TIME IN WHEN NO ONE GIVES THEM A CHANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE?!?

these companies look to hard at the words on the paper. you can be the worst worker in the universe but if the words on your resume actually catch the readers eye, then you stand a damn good chance of being employed.

that being said i have noticed an exponential explosion of slackerish underachievers who arent qualified to refill bong water get shut down time and time again because of their highly unprofessional approach.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Perhaps the problem doesn't lie in no candidates as much as it is that Human Resources has unreasonable expectations of candidates.

Unless you are talking about an advanced field of Engineering, Biochemistry, Aeronautics, or such, most positions in the $30-$40k range a monkey could be trained to do.

If I was hiring for a Junior SysAdmin, even though H.R. would "require" a 4 year Degree or equivalency of 10 years work experience, if the position went unfilled for longer than 2 months I'd go over H.R.'s heads to hire the first person I interviewed that showed a willingness and aptitude to learn on the job rather than keep that position unfilled for 6-12 months or longer.

Is a person with a Masters in Architecture and 25 years of job experience somehow less capable than a Journeyman in Construction? If an out of work Architect wanted to give Construction a try, I'd take them over no one even if they didn't meet the "specific" requirements.

I have almost 30 years experience in I.T., but in those 30 years I also have done everything from Phlebotomy, Cash Vault, Accounting, Freight Handler, Customer Service, Drywall Installation, Dispatcher, Cashier, Janitor, Paralegal, and Search & Rescue on the side during that time. In Senior I.T., my job requires me to be able to learn new skills daily, and every night I carry home more Technical Manuals than a College Student does with a 24 Credit Course load! There is nothing that I couldn't learn to do given 24-48 hours. For that reason, I wouldn't hesitate to give someone a chance just because they come from a different field or lack all of the prerequisite skills.

I've seen businesses have the same position unfilled for years at a time. The real reason they don't get "suitable" applicants is because those that are "qualified" for those positions won't touch them with a 10 foot pole if the employer is that picky and choosy. The highest paying job in my geographical region has gone unfilled for almost 6 years now. Even fulfilling all the requirements, neither I nor my friends will consider it, even though they are offering 10x what we make now. We wouldn't even consider it for 100x what we make now. If they haven't found someone good enough in those 6 years to fill that position then no one is ever going to be good enough for them. They are obviously an employer that would be impossible to satisfy.

Just as people have had to learn to broaden their horizons while lowering their expectations in their job search, so must employers learn to do likewise. It is as simple as that.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Also, a lot of these companies that are "hiring" don't technically have a position available. However, they advertise the job opening and interview endless amounts of people...looking for that one qualified "perfect fit". In which case, they will likely expand their overhead costs to bring the perfect candidate on board...and, likely, would subsequently fire someone else already on staff... someone who is least efficient within the company.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Though I do agree that a large part of the problem lies in the economics of relocation (especially now), I also think that these industries bear some responsibility for their current dilemma - one of the above posts touched on it. A lot of people, like me, who came out of college and had really good jobs for three years or less before those jobs were lost (in my case, from being laid off) found themselves in the position of applying to companies for positions which they were qualified for - but according to those companies, had either too much experience or not enough. Time after time continually getting rejected until finally they had to do what they had to do; get a job to pay the bills. The result? Companies that are complaining that they can't find enough "qualified" workers, or those who have the requisite four to six years experience because those very same companies refused to let them gain that experience.

Given the current economic state of the U.S. with so many people willing to learn anything they can to break into a different, more lucrative field, I have absolutely no pity for companies that can't find "qualified" candidates when they won't either do on-the-job training, help them through the education they need to succeed in that industry or simply take a chance on someone who's driven and has the requisite education, but maybe not all the experience they'd like.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Being a person that hires people and is currently struggling to find applicants just like the article suggests I can say I disagree with almost everyone so far.

The biggest problem is that most people who qualify as looking for a job are getting unemployment checks or a severance pay. They do the minimum required to keep getting these checks as they sit home and enjoy life.

Many magazine articles I read are even telling people to use this time in life to decide what you really want and not rush back into the work force.

In general many people have no clue how to write a resume because they either didn't put effort into it because of what I wrote above or they haven't done one in many years and are out of practice. If you can't convey why you should get picked on your resume then I have a secret for you..... you wont be picked.

In summary, most people unemployed are lazy and don't want jobs until their money runs out from the state or severance. This is the biggest problem today.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
This is all horse crap! My best friend is an HR Director with a Fortune 100 company and he will be the first to tell you that 99.9% of the time the compny is trolling for a perfect fit - one that they know full well doesn't exist.

He and I have discussed hiring philosophies of today's companies a myriad of times and it all boils down to one thing - companies want YOU to be the perfect employee, designed in THEIR mold, as opposed to finding a great candidate who could have a great opportunity built around their strengths, skills and abilities.

Corporations have become the new "assembly lines" - each employee is hired to perform a specific task in a specific way. Companies no longer value creativity or personal strengths - in fact, most view these as liabilities. They don't openly admit this as HR has been programmed to say and advertise on thing while searching for the opposite. The reality is that you may be a fantastic employee and bring incredible value to the company, but that is not what they seek. They are looking for a very specific part to fit in their "machine". If you are the wrong sized cog or a sprocket with one too many teeth, you will not be considered.

For additional information on the truth of this new paradigm, simply read Shop Craft As Sould Craft by Mathew Crawford. Welcome to the new world of white collar assembly line work, people!



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


I agree friend.

I work in IT and have had to fill positions very recently with people who had little to no job experience in positions that paid 50 to 60k a year.

These positions went unfilled for about 4 months and I went as you said to the canditates who showed the most promise and I have been very happy with their placements.

My senior members were able to train them in virtually no time at all. It just goes to show that on the job experience is sometimes not needed at all to have a productive employee.

~Keeper



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by whoshotJR
 



You can disagree with as much as you like, but it doesn't take away from the experiences that some of us have gone through. Not everyone who has been laid off is bleeding the system. Thank God I have a job now, but when I was laid off I was driven and hungry and tailored each resume as best I could to each company I was applying for according to what I thought they were looking for and what I could offer. In the end, most companies (except the one I now work for) had problems either with my lack of or large amount of experience (they were either looking for greenhorns who knew nothing that they could pay less or people with the experience of a CEO for mid-level positions) and the fact that I had worked in multiple fields (three) of the same discipline instead of limiting myself to just one for 10+ years. No offense to the hiring process, but when you start taking people out of consideration because you think they don't have enough experience or too much, or have tried to make themselves as marketable as possible by working in different fields, you set yourself up for situations like the OP - especially when you simply look at a piece of paper and don't actually talk to them. Some people are trying to bleed the system and do only what they have to in an effort to keep the unemployment checks coming, a lot aren't.

Another part of the problem IMO is that a lot of companies absolutely fail to sell themselves to qualified applicants. In as much as prospective applicants should do everything in their power to sell themselves, it's also generally expected that a company with an opening they want filled will sell themselves to that applicant if they're going to bother with an interview. That happens very rarely these days.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Legion2112
 


I agree with your statement about companies selling themselves to prospective employees as well.

I know when I put out a posting I do not only include what kind of salary you get but also health benefits, bonuses and various other programs that my company has put in place to help our employees.

We just recently opened a day care free for all employees who work full time and opened a cafetteria which provides for free meals as well.

There are a plethora of things an employer can do to attract potential highly skilled workers, just look at the Google Plex.

~Keeper



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Based on the pay scale shown for these jobs I would say that is part of the problem! What is not mentioned is the location of some of these jobs which might be the biggest problem.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I'm glad the art of seducing talent isn't lost on everyone. It's strange; I worked for a small bi-weekly newspaper straight out of college followed by a regional ad agency (from which the forementioned layoff came) followed by six years at a large tourist destination after months of fruitless searching. During all three, though the hiring process became more mechanized and less personal, I had face to face interviews that lasted from one to three hours, follow-up calls and editors/account execs/department managers trying to sell me on benefits, salary and company perks.

This most recent job termination brought home a stark reality; that a lot has changed since 2003. No cold calls, no face-to-face interviews - apply online, take a personality/skills assessment, go through a rather invasive background check and if you're lucky, you get the chance to prove to someone why they should hire you instead of having them do as much to prove why you should work for them. I can understand to a degree why a certain amount of automation helps, especially in weeding out people who truly are just filling their unemployment application quota for the week, but damn - what the hell happened to simply talking to someone to feel them out? Try to see past the resume to understand if they would truly be a good fit for a given position? It's almost as if HR departments these days are just too lazy to actually get their feet wet, to do anything but put people through at best, an almost mechanical, automated evaluation "process" because some seminar on workplace dynamics told them to do so.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
They probably aren't even trying to fill these positions. Post it, cry to the .gov you can't find qualified workers, then try to import some Indians/Indonesions etc. through the H1B Visa program.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Maybe it is time some of these companies overlook the experience aspect and base thier selection on aptitude and skill required to learn the job. After they find a suitable candidate who they feel meets this criteria they should focus on training and mentoring. All a person needs sometimes is the opportunity to pursue another career that they may well be spectacular at. There are many inexpensive ways train an employee. (in-house training, job shadowing, mentoring programs, veendor courses etc etc.)



[edit on 3-11-2009 by nepafogo]



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jefwane
They probably aren't even trying to fill these positions. Post it, cry to the .gov you can't find qualified workers, then try to import some Indians/Indonesions etc. through the H1B Visa program.


That's what I was thinking also. Import workers who will work for less money just so they get a chance to come to America.




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join