American IT companies can not find workers

Excellent summary. One of the best I have seen on ET about this subject. Thank you!

Quote from fframe38:

I agree completely. Have been in software engineering field for 25 years now. When I started out, software engineers were respected scientists who were paid well, had decent benefits, and solved worthwhile challenging problems. Management believed in fostering creativity, rewarding innovation, results over process, etc. The field also had a sort of cred, although tainted slightly by the geek/nerd image. Even the contracting world of the 1990s was still very good - savvy people with skills could still bring home a decent check with paid overtime.

I remember the first hints of the decline to come occurred with the expansion of H1-B programs to deal with the perceived "programmer shortage". This occurred around 1990-1991, during a very bad recession when many tech firms were laying off by the thousands. The funny thing is every time I hear about these perceived "programmer shortages" it is during a recession when people are laying off engineers. It didn't take too long to put 2+2 together and realize that it was a strategy to replace high cost workers with lower cost workers, and basically alter the supply/demand relationship permanently.

The problem was that in the beginning, the H1-B program was supposed to be used to bring top quality people over here to meet specific niche needs that were hard to fill. Over time, it was abused to a method of importing warm bodies over here, holding them hostage until they could get a green card, and watering down the salaries in the whole industry so that costs could be cut drastically. Instead of the savings being passed onto the customers or investors, it was largely lavished on the executives who had created the "savings". The same thing happened with outsourcing as well. Executives would do stupid things for the long term in order to get short-term results and bonuses.

A simultaneous effect was that the software engineering role became "de-skilled" to a large degree and it was considered more intelligent for a company to hire more average developers than fewer outstanding ones, even though productivity studies have shown up to a 28/1 productivity factor between top flight developers and the average drones hacking up code. The idea was to avoid developers having negotiating power and to be able to easily replace anybody in the organization without losing anything much.

In the old days, innovation and creativity was fostered and respected. It was far better to create something excellent even if it ran over cost somewhat or took a little longer to create than first thought. Later on, it became all about pushing whatever crap to market as fast as possible regardless of quality. Most times, it was some near worthless web weenie crap. In fact, with the subscription based pricing it is almost rewarded to have constant "updates" which are usually just bug fixing of stuff that should have worked correctly when a product was released initially.

The Agile development methology and open source stuff is basically the "Communist model" of development. Reducing everyone to a replaceable widget, facilitating outsourcing and micromanagement. It is no accident that software engineering salaries have basically been cut in half over the past 10 years or so when you take inflation into account. Another side effect is that most companies are no longer offering challenges that appeal to scientist and engineer types.

The end result is that the intelligent people moved on to other fields, or started their own businesses, or invested or whatever, and the field was abandoned to the hordes of Indians and Asians and the clueless MBA management models. Then we wonder why there is no "innovation"? WTF. You can't force innovation, and the incentives in place (or mostly "not in place") do not support it. In fact, software development is becoming more like a union job in most places than any kind of creative endeavor. Mediocrity is rampant, management is clueless, Dilbert-isms are rife throughout the industry, and the whole industry is now infatuated with this shallow web-weenie vaporware BS which doesn't solve any real problem of significance.

You want to do software - do it for yourself and use it to trade or further some creative endeavor. Don't bother working for some company that will have you blowing every spare minute of your life toiling away for their bonuses while you get scraps and watch your dollars evaporating into the night with each successive QE program, and then eventually you will be laid off or replaced by an incompetent idiot who can barely speak English.
 
I'm going to let you in on a little secret: there is no IT shortage in America and hasn't been one in 20 years. If you trade you know that it is silly to talk about a shortage without talking about price, just as you can always buy a stock -- you can always find a worker for any job. The price is the question.

In fact, educated people today of all caliber are cheaper then they ever have been in history. Why do you think that education is so important and that businesses promote it? An educated person is a commodity, like any other with a price. The more of that commodity available then the lower the price.

I'll share again my experience going through a Microsoft recruiter, he had basically a long list of qualified applicants and before I was "cleared for hire". I had entered the interview process a few times but had it abruptly cut short because someone had got into the "queue" ahead of me and this was at the peak of the bubble before unemployment rates had risen.

Now that I've shared that little secret. I'm going to share another secret.

Many tech jobs do not require an inordinate amount of education or training.

It doesn't take a genius to administer a database or provide troubleshooting. Of course, for someone to gain experience in several areas can take 5, 10, and more years -- often requiring more work then even a lawyer puts in. But, who gets payed more? The lawyer.

Why? Supply and demand. Lawyers are a traditionally protected occupation. People complain about unions but engineers, lawyers, dentist, and doctors are all protected fields: they require a license.

When I was in school a few years ago, a student mentioned computer science and one of the brightest students said, "Don't go into that because it is all outsourced." Many campuses have cut back or closed computer science courses.

What companies are experiencing is the FREE MARKET at work. They quit paying American workers to do tech jobs and American workers quit investing into that. The only difference is that the companies have a significant advantage in that it is much easier to BUY OFFSHORE work then to MOVE OVERSEAS. ASYMMETRIES, such as that, DEVELOP and ERODE as a function of technology on a regular basis. For example, publishers enjoyed the benefits of VERY CHEAP PRODUCTION from the time of the PRINTING PRESS until recently when CONSUMER efficiency increased due to the INTERNET. And while many such efforts in increased efficiency may not be in accordance with accepted norms, it would certainly be able to create EXCLUSIVE LOCK sharing systems that should be LEGAL. But would certainly be ATTACKED by the RECORDING INDUSTRY.

Other professions experience such boom and busts, if you looked at a bull market trend then you can see the people who get in early often fair very good but those who get in late often never do as well.

A good example of that would be the Bitcoin, early adopters profited well but the currency has been an extended and unrelenting bear market. The same thing happens with lawyers or any other commodity in a free market. People hear and see about lawyers making big coin and everyone goes to school to get that big coin. Inevitable, the market becomes over-saturated and students are left with debt that is disproportionate to their income.

I'd love to see technology salaries soar. It may be just the time. As we know, markets over extent and over correct all the time. But, in essence, people are not interested in technology because the ENTRY LEVEL jobs have been OFFSHORED and the more experienced jobs pay FAR LESS then the TIME, COST, and EFFORT required to learn them.
 
My sisters boyfriend spends an increasing amount of time in the US on IT projects mostly on the network side of things pretty much because they can't recruit enough people with the skills. Last year his company were flying folk in from the UK and Singapore for holiday cover in the US.
 
Theres no shortage of workers, they are just not willing to pay a decent wage, company execs treat I.T workers in all fields as shit, an expense and nothing else.

All executives in most companies believe I.T is easy as they have a compute at home, with wifi and all the latest bells and whistles....and they havent had a problem with their computers at home in years, so why can it be so hard........ in an enterprise its harder but they dont see it that way.

next they will outsource the network guys?....try calling a useless oversees level 2 and 3 support when the network has a major outage....:p ...but im sure they will try.
 
Quote from syswizard:

Because of all of the Indian outsourcing and the H1B and L1 programs, salaries in IT have declined dramatically past 10 years. I do consulting thru agencies and my income is about 40% of what it was 12 years ago.
As a result of this, NO COLLEGE ENTRANTS ARE GETTING INTO "STEM" Studies (Science, Technology-Software, Engineering, Math).
Thus, the shortage.
This of course was caused by some lawyers lobbying for large corps in Washington and telling congress a B.S. story about a "shortage of technical people". That started the H1B program, and the rest is history.

My wife is a Project Manager for IBM Global Services, and I can confirm this. Pretty much spot on.
 
The cheap slave-laboresque arbitrage for Western companies exploiting Indian ( and now Russian and Argentine ) skills in this area is the the true driver. The US advanced-degree college grads in the area ( I have a few in my family ) are avoiding this sector by intent, and are instead getting into other niche sectors and not wholesale software development.

There has been some considerable push back in recent years regarding this trend - in fact, a growing number of companies are now promoting and advertising the fact that they utilize American technical support desks. Many companies have been thinking long and hard as of late about the benefit vs. cost-savings quality of their outsourced overseas IT functions. There have been significant customer quality perception issues.
 
i agree with those who say it comes down to money.
In an ideal situation its cool work for a lot of money (trading systems).
Then its crap work for a lot of money (IT contract at big corp).
Then its cool work for little money (academia, national lab, RD)
Then its crap work for little money (IT)

However, nothing is stopping people from taking multiple "fulltime" jobs that are telecommute or one onsite job and multiple telecommute jobs. In my experience most jobs don't take up 40hrs/week; so just get 3 telecommute jobs that pay 80k/yr... simple
 
First, take a look at this link:

http://yourworkforcesolutions.com/images/stories/documents/state-tol-2010-11.pdf

This is from a survey done of companies in Florida which asked how many people they expected to hire for specific positions. Looking at "Network Analysts" for example, we see a projected growth of 4.88%, with 1519 potential openings, at an entry-level wage of $20.11/hourly ($40k/year), and a mean wage of $32.76/hourly ($68k/year).

Now, look at this:

http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=network+analyst&l=florida

This is a search of Indeed.com for "Network Analysts" in Florida. A quick click on a few of these postings shows that most, if not all, of the open positions require at least 5-7 years relevant experience, with many requiring specialized experience and multiple certifications.

So, as stated before, the disconnect seems to be the experience requirement, which serves as a major disincentive to people considering entering this field. Why spend four years getting a degree for a job that pays $40k/year to start, in a field that typically requires at least five years of experience to get hired?

Whatever happened to "entry-level" jobs, where acompany would hire a recent grad and train them to do the work they needed done? The answer: outsourcing
 
Quote from rosy2:

i agree with those who say it comes down to money.
Then its crap work for a lot of money (IT contract at big corp).
There's one small problem with this scenario: AGENCIES.
And wow, are they ever so greedy !
They'll whittle that "lot of money" down to a "meager amount" in the blink of an eye ball.
 
Quote from bone:

The cheap slave-laboresque arbitrage for Western companies exploiting Indian ( and now Russian and Argentine ) skills in this area is the the true driver. The US advanced-degree college grads in the area ( I have a few in my family ) are avoiding this sector by intent, and are instead getting into other niche sectors and not wholesale software development.

There has been some considerable push back in recent years regarding this trend - in fact, a growing number of companies are now promoting and advertising the fact that they utilize American technical support desks. Many companies have been thinking long and hard as of late about the benefit vs. cost-savings quality of their outsourced overseas IT functions. There have been significant customer quality perception issues.


exploiting indians , russians? their wages are going up and they make more than most workers.
 
Back
Top