Comments on GAO Forum on Workforce Trends
Offshoring is moving up the food chain -- higher level jobs are
going to LCCs (Low Cost Countries - Boston Consulting Group's
term), It's true that wages will rise in those countries as
expectations rise, but that can take a decade or two, and meanwhile
many U.S. jobs will be lost for what, in the long term, turns out to
be little comparative advantage.
I have been asked for the prescription to avoid job loss in mergers,
downsizing, "rightsizing" or offshoring. For downsizing, the
workers retained will be those who are most productive and have the
most current skills. As in the joke about the two campers
trying to outrun the bear, success is running just a little faster
than your competitor. For continuing education, IEEE's new XELL
distance-learning program (now in prototyping) could be a boost
here.
In mergers, success may depend on where you sit -- if there are two
IT groups, the one in the company taking over may survive while the
one in the absorbed company may disappear. It may be too
complex to try to evaluate the relative performance of those in the
two groups, to pick and choose who gets fired from among both
groups.
For offshoring, the answer is to jump ship; there may be temporary
relief available in traveling to the offshore location to train the
new people who will be taking over your job, but that just delays the
inevitable parting of the ways.
Don't expect baby boomers to disappear from the workforce. As
noted in a new Fortune article, boomers who expected to inherit their
retirement nest egg (one estimate in congressional testimony some
years ago was $11 trillion passing this way [B.
Douglas Bernheim, The Merrill Lynch Baby Boomer Retirement Index:
Update ‘96, 7,
21-22 (1996) quoted in https://www.sec.gov/pdf/report99.pdf],
and a report on the senior travel market pegged it at $10.4 trillion;
see http://www.ntaonline.com/staticfiles/car_boomer.pdf
), are finding that stock market reverses and their
parents' nursing home needs have pretty much dried up that source,
and part-time work (at least) will be an expectation in
retirement. In 30 years, there could be 77 million boomers of
retirement age.
Both presidential candidates have discussed amnesty as a way to meet
U.S. needs for "jobs nobody wants". https://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/bush.immigration/index.html
and https://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040629_1754.html
Lou Dobbs Moneyline last night featured a debate between an
immigration lawyer and Tom Tancredo, moderated by Pat Buchanan, on
the subject of immigration. Tancredo favored clearing up the
backlog and obstacles to legal immigration (green cards). The
lawyer favored that plus amnesty. The previously-surfaced Bush
amnesty proposal did not distinguish between low-skilled illegals and
highly-skilled ones.
Approval of changes to ERISA to permit phased retirement could help
keep older workers in the workforce longer, aiding in mentoring
younger workers and transferring their intellectual capital before
they finally retire. Clarification of Section 1706, to permit
retirees to work as consultants for their former employers, could
avoid the dilemma with employee benefits programs when they are
classed as regular employees. Perhaps CWPC should reissue the
previous position statement on this.
Ed Perkins has posted his view that conventional college curricula
are not meeting the needs for mid-career continuing education.
The Dallas section is interested in doing something about that.
IEEE-USA also formerly had a position statement on tax incentives for
continuing education that should be reviewed for reissue. See
https://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/positions/taxlearn.html
George
From a posting in the Employment & Career Strategies VC
Forum https://www.ieeecommunities.org/ecs
---excerpt---
HIGHLIGHTS OF A GAO FORUM
Workforce Challenges and Opportunities For the 21st Century:
Changing Labor Force Dynamics and the Role of Government Policies
What Participants Said
While participants debated the extent of future labor shortages
and which industries and workers may be affected, they generally
agreed that the United States will soon face tight labor markets in
part because of projected demographic trends and the need for
higher skills in order to be competitive for higher-wage jobs. Forum
participants made the following observations regarding demographic
trends and skills:
• The baby boom generation could affect the U.S. labor market.
The approaching retirement of the baby boom generation could lead to
tight labor markets, affecting some industries more than others.
• Labor force participation rates are low among certain
populations.High school dropouts, low-income individuals, and some
minority groups continue to have low labor force participation.
• Immigrants help meet U.S. labor demands. Both legal and
undocumented immigrants play a role in the current and future
workforce.
• The United States is moving toward a knowledge-based economy
that requires higher skills. A knowledge-based economy increasingly
requires workers to have more advanced skills and higher levels of
education than in the past.
• Workers are not receiving needed training. More training is
needed, although it is unclear whether employers or employees are
responsible for providing it.
• Some countries have a greater supply of young, well-educated
workers. The United States faces a significant demographic difference
in terms of the age of U.S. workers and their technological skill
compared with workers in countries such as India.
• Offshoring of jobs has increased and is likely to continue.
Given the high level of education and worker skill development in
some countries, jobs moving offshore are no longer low-wage,
low-skill jobs.
• Career education and apprenticeship training are not given
enough emphasis. Some youth may not pursue higher education and
instead need training, such as career education or apprenticeship
training.
At the forum, participants suggested several potential solutions to
address the tight labor market that considered both the needs of the
U.S. labor force and the realities of a tight fiscal environment:
• Increase the effectiveness of publicly funded training
programs.
• Encourage employers and unions to take the lead in determining
training needs.
• Promote alternative education and training opportunities.
• Keep older workers engaged in the labor force.
• Consider changing immigration policies to better meet future
workforce needs.
Highlights at https://www.gao.gov/highlights/d04845sphigh.pdf
George F McClure
g.mcclure@ieee.org
1730 Shiloh Ln
Winter Park FL 32789
Tel 407-647-5092
Fax 407-644-4076
Mobile 407-758-0321