We've been hearing much about the skills gap that exists out there, where people aren't being hired for available jobs because they lack the skills needed in today's economy. Do you think that is accurate or is it a red herring? This article does not believe that a lack of skilled labor is the issue to persistently high unemployment.

http://www.epi.org/publication/shortage-...d-workers/

Generally, I think that if the jobs aren't being filled and they are truly needed that they will train the people how to do the job.

I didn't read the link, but I'm going to guess that it is implying that as well.

I've been in the Nuclear Power industry my whole career (35 years +) First Navy and now commercial. I now consult for nuclear utilities. The commercial nuclear workforce is a rapidly aging workforce, with new (younger) workers frequently not having the skill set to work. (my Daughter is an aggie Nuclear Engineer and has never set foot in a commercial nuclear power station). On top of that I have seen a drastic reduction in skilled tradesman, (Welders, electricians, millrights...etc) The amount of rework and COQ (Cost of Quality) is staggering. Of course this industry isn't the most attractive to work in because of the necessary regulatory environment.

(05-08-2014 09:43 AM)bevotex Wrote:  I've been in the Nuclear Power industry my whole career (35 years +) First Navy and now commercial. I now consult for nuclear utilities. The commercial nuclear workforce is a rapidly aging workforce, with new (younger) workers frequently not having the skill set to work. (my Daughter is an aggie Nuclear Engineer and has never set foot in a commercial nuclear power station). On top of that I have seen a drastic reduction in skilled tradesman, (Welders, electricians, millrights...etc) The amount of rework and COQ (Cost of Quality) is staggering. Of course this industry isn't the most attractive to work in because of the necessary regulatory environment.

I have a buddy who got his PHD in Nuclear Engineering but hasn't stepped foot in a commercial power station. All gov't work at Los Alamos and Oakridge. Hasn't gotten a sniff from anything commercial yet he has a nuclear isotope of some sort that he discovered named after him. Brilliant guy, but commercial utilities seem to be cutting nuclear jobs, not adding or backfilling.

(05-08-2014 09:43 AM)bevotex Wrote:  I've been in the Nuclear Power industry my whole career (35 years +) First Navy and now commercial. I now consult for nuclear utilities. The commercial nuclear workforce is a rapidly aging workforce, with new (younger) workers frequently not having the skill set to work. (my Daughter is an aggie Nuclear Engineer and has never set foot in a commercial nuclear power station). On top of that I have seen a drastic reduction in skilled tradesman, (Welders, electricians, millrights...etc) The amount of rework and COQ (Cost of Quality) is staggering. Of course this industry isn't the most attractive to work in because of the necessary regulatory environment.

I believe that our labor market is disjointed at the moment, where too many kids are going to 4 year schools to earn humanities/social majors instead of pursuing either 4 year STEM degrees or 2 year technical degrees where they learn an actual skill.

The premise of the article is that the majority of the issues with the labor market is due to aggregate demand for goods and services as opposed to any significant structural issues with unemployment. I think it's a mixture of both, but not 100% convinced it's dominated by a lack of consumer demand and business spending just yet.