Three million open jobs in U.S., but who's qualified?

Despite its efforts to retrain and recruit, Alcoa has 27 job openings at its Michigan plant alone.

Byron Pitts: Who do you blame for the skills gap in this country?

Klaus Kleinfeld: I don't blame anybody for that.

Byron Pitts: Who bears responsibility for you?

Klaus Kleinfeld: I think it's more an educational aspect. It's-- I think it's a sensitivity to understand what makes a country and a business competitive.

Byron Pitts: I would imagine if you had a parts gap, you'd close it right away, right?

Klaus Kleinfeld: If we had a parts gap, we'd try to close it right away, yes.

Byron Pitts: Then why can't that occur with the skills gap?

Klaus Kleinfeld: Don't get from this that we're sitting together here because our-- because Alcoa is complaining that we can't fill the skills gap. That is absolutely not my message. We can absolutely fill that. Absolutely. I mean, the-- for Alcoa, we can do it. We are doing it. And many of my colleagues or other CEOs are doing it.

Byron Pitts: But if manufacturing is doing all that it can to close this skills gap, then why is there still a skills gap?

Klaus Kleinfeld: Well, this is not a society where you can tell somebody what-- where to go work, or where to-- what education to get, right?

Byron Pitts: Do you think if manufacturing paid more, could that be part of the issue? Part of the equation?

Klaus Kleinfeld: I don't think that manufacturing is not paying well. In fact, I think manufacturing is paying very, very well.

Peter Cappelli disagrees.

Peter Cappelli: This is a market. And so, you know, if you're not willing to pay more, don't expect to get better quality people.

Cappelli teaches management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. He says -- with supply and demand -- a shortage of skilled workers should lead to rising wages.

Peter Cappelli: One of the things we know now is wages are not going up. In fact, they've been stagnant and some cases even declining over time. So where is the shortage?

Byron Pitts: What's changed in the way that American companies hire workers compared to a few decades ago?

Peter Cappelli: I think there are big changes. And I think this is the heart of what is new. What's new now is that employers are not expecting to hire and train people. If you turn the clock back a generation ago, there really was none of this discussion about skill gaps and skill problems.

Byron Pitts: Because companies provided the training.

Peter Cappelli: Companies did it themselves. Companies are now saying, for all kinds of reasons, "We're not going to do it anymore." And maybe they're right, they can't do it. But what they probably can't do is say, "We're not going to do it, and it's your problem. It's your problem to provide us with what we need, Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer. You need to pay for this for us."

Taxpayers are paying for training in Nevada, where it costs about $60,000 to prepare 20 students for jobs. Karl Hutter from Click Bond plans on hiring people from the program.

Byron Pitts: If there's something that you want, that you need for your company, then why don't you pay for it?

• « Previous Page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next Page »

[dash_bannon]

As companies skip out on paying taxes and get more heaping tax cuts "to create jobs" communities suffer from lack of income to pay for things like schools and training.

In essence, this article points out a key problem of business today: companies want a free lunch. They want trained workers but don't want to pay for their training directly or indirectly by paying taxes.

Sorry, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

[notspin]

Just as many other people have commented, the problem is not at the bottom; rather it is at the top. Executives and owners of manufacturing companies expect to make millions of dollars a year while paying their workers $25,000 to $35,000 a year, or less. These are the same people who want less government, but want taxpayers to pay for training their workers. These jobs are not high-tech but do demand a lot of attention to quality control from the skilled workers. Worker safety is also an issue: you can lose fingers in these machines, cut your hands on sharp metal, and breathe in metal dust, fumes and vapors from the metal cutting processes. It seemed like 60 minutes was portraying these jobs as high-tech glamour jobs, however the skills are easily learned by anyone with average intelligence. After that you don't learn much more other than how to work as fast as you can to keep from being replaced by the next new hire. There is no job security; you can be fired, without cause at any time. Look at what is happening with Hostess right now; the workers are losing their jobs while people at the top can still make millions by selling Hostess trademarks. There is going to have to be a shift in attitude about worker training, compensation and safety starting from the top down, otherwise we will keep being trounced by manufacturing in other countries. By the way, I was making $12.00 an hour with benefits in 1993, and most people I knew that were working as machinists were making more than that.

[jw2501]

I almost fell out of my chair when I seen this. 12 dollars an hour.....really, REALLY!!! I knew of Steel workers in the 70's who made 18 an hour right out of high school. A friend of mine was in Texas in 1968 and Texas Instruments offered him 18 and hour right out of high schhol to work on machines. This is so sad. Meanwhile some executive or worse yet some banker makes millions and doesnt do an ounce of work all day. That reporter acted like $12 is a great pay. A full time worker in a fast food store makes at least that. Here I sit as a network administrator with 18 year experience behind me and I can't find a job. I guess I must be over qualified.

[hicountrygal]

Your grammar is horrible, maybe that's why you can't find a job

[kbirc]

Yes, totally. I watched the episode and couldn't believe that a worker that requires that kind training, including trigonometry, is going to wind up making $12/hour. Yes, I know, it's better than welfare, also comes with benefits. That doesn't mean it isn't an insulting wage. To say nothing of barely liveable.

[saturday8pm]

Good story, but I'm not quite buying industry's complaints wholesale.

Here's why:

First, public education, despite its myriad of problems and the disturbing trends such as dropout rates and testing quotas, was never designed to prepare the public for specific jobs. It is meant to round individuals. Refinement occurs at tech vocational schools, college, university, internships, work study, apprenticeships. Absolutely there are skills gaps, but for whom? Is it possible that companies want it both ways, less funding for public education, and instead support vouchers, for-profit schools, private schools, Montesorri, endless reform, as well as "out-of-the-box" employees who require little to no training?

Let's be honest here. We're in uncharted territory here where technology has evolved so quickly that neither the law nor the community at large can harness it effectively. If it could, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Fact is ... folks who can do trig normally don't pursue jobs in manufacturing, they go into better paying jobs in civil engineering and the like. The fact that industrial jobs require such skills for what normally are repetitive jobs is relatively new. So if the skills sets are made higher for jobs that traditionally went to folks with less education, what would you expect? Never mind that incentives for high skills sets are not at pace with actual job demands.

Net: Industry has to work comparable to the current German model, which is, form apprenticeships. To ask public education to train for the job exclusively is unrealistic and is what vocational and tech schools are all about. Kids have the option to go to them at the high school level. Shop classes alone won't cut it these days. Yes, our schools can do better. But industry has to invest in its group body if it wants fulfillment, instead of shifting all the responsibility for failure on public education.

[dash_bannon]

I like that idea of apprenticeships. If we changed how we did education in America more like the German model, kids could get training they want and need for future careers.

[Aflac48]

True, public education's job to to produce well rounded workers with the basic skills. As it is stated in the article, and many comments on here prove this, people are not coming out of high school, and apparently not even college, with a grasp of basic skills. Math is terrible, grammar is terrible, problem solving is terrible. Employers shouldn't have to teach you EVERYTHING about how to do a job. You should have the skills to do a job (math, grammar, etc.) before you start, teaching you how the machine works falls on the employer. I think that is really the skills gap they are talking about.

[saturday8pm]

Good story, but I'm not quite buying industry's complaints wholesale.

Here's why:

First, public education, despite its myriad of problems and the disturbing trends such as dropout rates and testing quotas, was never designed to prepare the public for specific jobs. It is meant to round individuals. Refinement occurs at tech vocational
schools, college, university, internships, work study, apprenticeships. Absolutely there are skills gaps, but for whom? Is it possible that companies want it both ways, less funding for public education, and instead support vouchers, for-profit schools, private schools, Montesorri, endless reform, as well as "out-of-the-box" employees who require little to no training?

Let's be honest here. We're in uncharted territory here where technology has evolved so quickly that neither the law nor the community at large can harness it effectively. If it could, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Fact is ... folks who can do trig normally don't pursue jobs in manufacturing, they go into better paying jobs in civil engineering and the like. The fact that industrial jobs require such skills for what normally are repetitive jobs is relatively new. So if the skills sets are made higher
for jobs that traditionally went to folks with less education, what would you expect? Never mind that incentives for high skills sets are not at pace with actual job demands.

Net: Industry has to work comparable to the current German model, which is, form apprenticeships. To ask public education to train for the job exclusively is unrealistic and is what vocational and tech schools are all about. Kids have the option to go to them at the high school level. Shop classes alone won't cut it these days. Yes, our schools can do better. But industry has to invest in its group body if it wants fulfillment, instead of shifting all the responsibility for failure on public education.

[saturday8pm]

Ooops, double-post. Read the one above instead.

[TolerationInModeration]

When I was a kid, in high school and even jr. high, we had shop classes. There was metal shop and wood shop in jr. high. There was metal shop, machine shop, auto shop and wood shop in high school. I myself took both shop classes that were available in jr. high, and took metal and machine shop classes in high school. It wasn't until 10 years after high school that I found myself benefitting from the exposure to those shop classes, but it did happen. I landed work with a company where I worked myself into a machinist position. I picked up on the lathe and milling processes fast because of my prior exposure as a kid. Sadly, I left that company after several years to pursue another trade, one which has now pretty much dried up. Now, I am trying to get back into a machinist position but lack CNC experience.
My point is this. Our school system has abandoned any pretense of training programs that will help kids to find work in manufacturing, since I know of none - at least in my area - that offer ANY shop classes. The old equipment has been sold off years ago and is now gone forever, as well as the shop techers. The manual machines that I worked on as a kid are very outdated (they were OLD then!) but still functioned excellently as a tool to teach basic machining process. Someone coming into the market with that kind of "leg up" would be easier to train.
Now, as for the part of this article that observed that there was a training program out there that would squeeze 1 year of training into 16 weeks, I call bulls**t. One year of training equals one year of training. You cannot expect that anyone will experience the same quality of training in less than 31% of that time. The best you can hope to do is "teach to the test" which is the sad trend that this country has taken, and is the reason for so many under-qualified people being churned out of our education system.

[sonnybaby100]

Journalism, we hardly know thee! It seems that rather than providing a well-rounded view of this topic that includes some historical backg-rounding, you choose to go the easy, bite-sized route. You see, not too long ago there were these things called "union." They historically kept industry wages up (a lot more than $12/hr), ensured good benefits and pensions, and provided training and apprenticeships. If you really wanted to present why there is a "shortage" of qualified workers in the United States, you need not look no further than the anti-union fervor of the last 40 years. But of course, you do not have the courage to present unions in a positive light: loyalty to your corporate bosses is stronger than the need to be true journalists.

[KLO82]

Wait, we are supposed to think that the problem is with the workforce, when these greedy companies can't find skilled talented and bright people willing to work for 25,000K a year--2k above the FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL??

How unpatriotic, greedy, and short sighted of these companies to fault the American workforce for their cheap and greedy needs.

The irony is, that during the interview they stressed the importance of these positions for safety of their products. Seems like the issue isn't a lack of qualified workers, but a much needed reality check to these companies that they are not going to get engineers on $12 an hour. People cannot pay student loans, and support themselves, let alone a family on 25k a year.

Shame on them, shame on CBS for calling this a relevant story. It simply demotivates the already unemployed even more to here these cheap companies gripe and blame the worker.

[sonnybaby100]

Amen! What a travesty to the American worker!

[AHSTeacher]

I just have to chime in here about what our high school in Iowa is doing to help students prepare for the 21st century. We have a high school of approximately 420 students. Juniors and seniors have the option of going to our community college academy which serves the county. We send 80 students per year to get college credits and Career Edge Academies. Here's some information about the Academies:

"These groups of career-focused college credit courses are available to high school students and focus on academic and technical preparation for today's workforce.
These programs include:
Metal Fabrication
Welding
Ag GPS/GIS Technology
Local Area Networking
Automotive Technology
Engineering/Project Lead the Way
Graphics and Media Communication
Health Science
Arts and Science
Architectural/Construction Technology"

Links are:
http://www.kirkwood.edu/careeracademies


http://www.kirkwood.edu/site/index.php?p=18640

[Protect_US_Jobs]

Had Romney talked more about protecting American jobs earlier on in the campaign, rather than waiting for the last two presidential debates, I think voters would have thought that he had more substance and might actually be on the side of the middle class. When he finally talked about the use of tariffs, leveling the playing field, China's unethical trade practices and bringing manufacturing back to the USA is when I finally decided to vote for him. Before that, I couldn't believe what a joke he was and felt that he was the exact opposite of what middle class Americans (US Citizens) needed. It was also hard to get around Bain and that 47% comment, which just confirmed even more that he was who he was we thought he was. He came across completely different during the debates than he did during the bulk of his campaign. But even though I voted for him, I can't say that I really trusted him to enact tariffs and other measures that would protect the jobs of US citizens. Also his automatically attaching a green card to every college diploma that foreigners receive comment was an indication of how he thinks as well.

If Both Parties don't start actually doing something to fix the real problems in our country like "out-sourcing", illegal immigration, the out of control costs of health care insurance and the safe harvesting, production and distribution of much more our own natural energy here in the USA by the next election - American citizens may just have to run a nation-wide campaign to vote out every single incumbent elected official, so that maybe they'll finally get the message.

Wouldn't it be More Productive if Our Elected Leaders Started Working Together as AMERICANS for AMERICANS and AMERICA, instead of just bickering, stalling and posturing for the next election as democrats and republicans! The American People have had it with this unproductive BS! The sad thing is that both parties stink! Neither party is really looking out for the best interest of the US Citizens who elect them and who they're supposed to represent.

Perot 1992 "Jobs getting sucked out of the country" - Many people saw it back then, but unfortunately too many people bought into the spin of "BS" that we were being sold.

YouTube - Giant Sucking Sound - Ross Perot 1992 Presidential Debate.flv

And this something that most of us already knew at that time, because it was just common sense!

You may want to check this site out: economyincrisis.org

economyincrisis.org/content/protectionism-matter-self-survival#comment-6632

economyincrisis.org/content/unethical-predatory-practices

Too bad we'll never see these types of articles in the mainstream media

It's appears that the foreign interests are influencing our media as well, just watch the ABC Nightline special on Apple's iPhone and iPad products being made in China that ends with the dramatic biased comment "That you can be the nation that lines up to make these products or the nation the lines up to buy them, but it's impossible to be both". What BS propaganda! ABC has direct ties to Apple and Foxconn.

It also doesn't help us compete when these companies are subsidized by their communist government.

This week even "60 Minutes" got into the act with their BS show about US manufacturing companies not being able to find enough qualified help. It doesn't help, since manufacturing has been declining for decades, that our children are being pushed towards liberal arts degrees rather than technical training which could have led to jobs, had we not been going down the ever increasing path of "Out-Sourcing".

[geopoko3]

Your comments really hit the mark. The media is no longer independent just another profit center for a large corporation. I read or see an article about 'open' jobs and lack of qualified candidates about once a month in numerous fields, but I never see an exploration of why companies won't train people they need. All I ever see are comments like the ones from the employers here "I can't afford to train workers". Well...maybe you need to charge more for a bit more for your products so can stay in business. Supply and demand, let the ACTUAL free market economy work.