Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

unsinkable

Unskilled, semi-skilled, skilled labor

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

And we need to have jobs that do support a life, that pay a living wage, that don't require extra training and education. Not everyone can be doctors! Someone has to dig ditches and wash cars and clean schools, etc etc. It used to be that there were a lot of jobs that a person could do right out of high school, without much extra training or education, and support themselves. Now? Not so much. How did we do it before, where a person could work an entry level job and pay for a small place to live, groceries, etc and now we can't?

Because the minimum wage used to be much higher relative to the COL. This is from a 2017 article in Business Insider: "Had the minimum wage been adjusted for average growth, the current minimum wage would be $11.62. ... Had it grown at the same rate as American productivity, it [would have been] $19.33" in 2017.

The system is structured to ensure that all of the increased value in productivity gets funneled to the already wealthy instead of benefitting the workers who are actually producing it. So the rich get richer, while claiming the working poor deserve to be poor — if they weren't so lazy and unmotivated, they could just enroll in one of the millions of (nonexistent) free training programs that would allow them to move up into one of the tens of millions of (nonexistent) better paying jobs.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On May 16, 2019 at 8:50 AM, SKL said:

I am a believer in entry level / stepping stone jobs.  I had them as a youth and I would like my kids to experience them too, while they are still maturing and don't yet need to support themselves independently.

For those who need a "living wage," they need to step up and get the training and experience that justifies the pay.  That's part of being an adult.  If they have some disability that prevents that, then there are (or should be) social programs to fill the gap.

Implying that the working poor are just too lazy and childish to bother getting better paid jobs is not only incredibly patronizing, it totally ignores the actual numbers involved here — 42% of American workers earn less than $15/hr. We are talking about tens of millions of workers. Where are the free or low-cost training programs for these tens of millions of people? Where is the free child care for the millions of working mothers making less than $15/hr, so they can get this training? And where are the tens of millions of better paying jobs to employ these newly-trained workers?

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quill said:

I think one interesting part of the picture is that jobs with a low barrier to entry (and thus, typically low wages, at least at first) do attract people who are not proactive enough, disciplined enough, literate enough or some other important feature, to do a job requiring degrees. For instance, at one point, dh tried for literally years to employ a good plumber’s helper. No degree or certificate necessary; just show up, take direction, and don’t be messy. He hired young guys numerous times, but these employees failed. The people who are more on-the-ball typically get their certifications; they don’t look for plumber’s helpers jobs. 

I have a friend who keeps trying to hire employees for her cleaning company. No barrier to entry; no degree or certification needed. People do not show up for work. She says for every five she hires, only one actually comes to work.

So. I think that is one reason why many jobs have been professionalized. It’s why many jobs which used to require nothing but a high school diploma now require at least a certification program. It is a way to weed out people who don’t make good employees. When a job is available to someone and they literally didn’t have to do a single thing but fill out an application, you’re going to see a high percentage of unsuitable applicants.

 

The bolded is very derogatory towards literally millions of people.  It's bigotry via classism.

My husband works with nothing but degree professionals and they are just as lazy and full of crap as any other people on the planet.  They don't show up for interviews because they decided to go to another.  Many companies interview dozens and dozens and purposely hire 3-5 knowing some aren't going to actually fill the position or work out. They come in late because crap happened or they have mental illness or they just wanted to skip work to enjoy something more enjoyable that day.  People are not better employees just because they have a degree.  That's no holds barred BS.

There's literally dozens of reasons why the lower classes or the non-degreed don't show up for jobs and for the most part it has nothing to do with the quality of their character or work ethic, and there's no evidence at all that a degree makes a difference.

Edited by Murphy101
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mom is an assistant teacher at Head Start and has  no degree. However, she's been in teaching since the 80s. Should we throw out a great teacher who the kids love just because she doesn't have a degree?

Shoot, I don't have a degree and work in a department where I'm the only person without one. A degree is not necessary to do my job, and it doesn't show that I didn't try hard enough. I have never been able to afford to get a degree, and now as an adult who has to work full-time in order to pay bills it's incredibly difficult to get back to school. 

Making a degree a requirement, for many jobs, does nothing but weed out a lot of really good and qualified applicants.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

The bolded is very derogatory towards literally millions of people.  It's bigotry via classism.

My husband works with nothing but degree professionals and they are just as lazy and full of crap as any other people on the planet.  They don't show up for interviews because they decided to go to another.  Many companies interview dozens and dozens and purposely hire 3-5 knowing some aren't going to actually fill the position or work out. They come in late because crap happened or they have mental illness or they just wanted to skip work to enjoy something more enjoyable that day.  People are not better employees just because they have a degree.  That's no holds barred BS.

There's literally dozens of reasons why the lower classes or the non-degreed don't show up for jobs and for the most part it has nothing to do with the quality of their character or work ethic, and there's no evidence at all that a degree makes a difference.

Are you denying that there is such a thing as a poor-quality employee? Are you trying to say that millions of people fail to pursue certification, degrees or training in a field through no fault of their own? That’s a load of bull. 

There are tons of people who don’t care about working much or would rather watch TV and drink a beer or who don’t have enough long view to think through what they hope to be doing six months from now, or two years, or four. I’m not talking about a theoretical low wage earner, I’m talking about literal people who my husband attempted to hire for a no-degree-needed job, or my friend in the same position. You know how easy it is to find an alert, mentally together, reliable, non-substance-abusing person who wants to be a plumber’s helper? It’s like trying to find a freaking unicorn. That’s not classist; it’s our actual, lived reality. 

I’m NOT saying all the white collar employees are always perfect, while the unskilled labor is always dreadful. But a person who goes to the effort of completing a program of training, or a college degree program, is manifestly able to work with some diligence for a defined period of time in order to accomplish what he set out to do. This does weed out the people who can’t/won’t work at something for a period of time to accomplish a fixed goal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, kdsuomi said:

My mom is an assistant teacher at Head Start and has  no degree. However, she's been in teaching since the 80s. Should we throw out a great teacher who the kids love just because she doesn't have a degree?

Shoot, I don't have a degree and work in a department where I'm the only person without one. A degree is not necessary to do my job, and it doesn't show that I didn't try hard enough. I have never been able to afford to get a degree, and now as an adult who has to work full-time in order to pay bills it's incredibly difficult to get back to school. 

Making a degree a requirement, for many jobs, does nothing but weed out a lot of really good and qualified applicants.

Of course not. Obviously, someone with a proven track record does not need to go get papers late in life. 

Your middle paragraph is the reason I disagree with those (very prevalent in homeschooling circles particularly) who poo-poo getting a college degree, steer their kids towards not pursuing a degree and simplstically say they can go to college later if need be. I have been to college as a mom/adult and it’s hard. It’s a lot of juggling and it’s hard to balance what my kids need with what I want for myself and it’s all too easy to back-burner my degree at this point in life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, unsinkable said:

hahahaha...got away from you?

i started the thread...got told what I had read in another thread wasn't said, then I pointed out it was, with quotes. Got told again, nope, no one thinks that. 

This thread goes on with people saying again what I had quoted from other thread. 

But, nope, no one said that or thinks like that.

LOL

*There is nothing wrong with calling unskilled labor, "unskilled labor." And IMO, it is diminished, and the people who perform it are diminished, when that is not acknowledged.*

And another thing...people have pretty short memories of all the threads over the years where posters would LOL at people who were the education majors in college, bc according to the LOLers, they were the stupidest people in the easiest majors. "hahahaha, did you ever see their homework?! hahaha! They had to make bulletin boards! hee-hee-hee

Yeah, when Iast checked there were a few posts, and when I got back to it there were three pages, and I was replying without taking the time to catch up. Sorry if my comment was confusing. Not sure what you thought I meant by that...  I was obviously not being clear, so hope that makes a bit more sense!

Actually, I'm not entirely sure from this post what your take is either. Like, are you saying that people on this board do look down on unskilled labour but deny it?

 

ETA: Because I *thought* you were trying to say is that there is nothing wrong with being called unskilled and people should just get over it.
But read this definition: "An unskilled worker is an employee who does not use reasoning or intellectual abilities in their line of work. These workers are typically found in positions that involve manual labor such as packager, assembler, or apprentice, or farm worker." Then tell me an apprentice or farm worker who doesn't use reasoning or intellectual ability? The people who make up these definitions have clearly never done these jobs, and it *is* a pretty presumptuous and insulting definition.

Edited by KathyBC
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2019 at 2:02 PM, EmseB said:

Have you ever run a small business? 

The point is wages don't exist in a vacuum. If you think every business owner is swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck and just refuses to pay his employees $5 more per hour, then I have to assume you have not. Employee salaries are a carefully budgeted item just like everything else. Comfortable isn't really the issue when many small business owners often forgo taking a salary themselves to get off the ground, get through tough economic times, or to try to grow their business. If I run a bakery and the price of grain goes up I have raise the sales price on my bread. Similarly, if the price of labor goes up, I have to make up that loss somewhere or go out of business. It's telling that you think no business is preferable to a business paying $7.25/hour when that bit of income could make a huge difference for someone for a variety of reasons.

It is denying economic reality to say that we can raise wages without causing a ripple effect in other areas of the economy. It does us no good to earn extra money if prices are higher or less people overall have jobs.

Your argument is emotionally compelling but doesn't address the actual issues with raising wages independent of other economic factors.

When unemployment is high, we don't tell businesses to just hire more people to solve that problem because in general people realize that unemployment isn't a simple matter of businesses being unwilling to hire people. I don't know why people seem to think the answer of low wages is just telling businesses to pay more.  

Everyone says, "Oh, I will pay a little more so that businesses can pay a living wage," but the problem is you've just also raised prices on those same people you wanted to lift out of poverty by paying them more. It's so obvious the problem can't be solved this way. And yet.

 

So...if business margins cannot support the additional pay, and those who are working for $7.25 can't make ends meets, then who makes up the difference? 

Hint: it starts with tax and ends with payers via the social safety net (as limited as it may be.)

So the question could also be posed as why should businesses be indirectly subsidized by the taxpayer?  And let's nor pretend these are only small businesses being subsidized.  WalMart and other major corporations benefit even more than the typical small business.  WalMart has been known to even provide employees on how to apply for government assistance.

If we are okay with subsidizing business, then fine.  But that means the constant attacks on the social safety net need to be dropped as well. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Quill said:

Are you denying that there is such a thing as a poor-quality employee? Are you trying to say that millions of people fail to pursue certification, degrees or training in a field through no fault of their own? That’s a load of bull.

Of course there is.  Dh had to fire a recent hire *in the 6 figures* because they just wouldn’t do what they were supposed to do. And that was after making exceptions to the job requirements that the person had requested in the interview. I’ve also had crummy waitresses, cashiers, and the like. In retail, I’ve tried to manage heroin addicts and my own direct boss who came and went as they pleased (probably also on some sort of drugs.) There are, most definitely, people who suck.

But, yeah, I do think there are millions of people who can’t, for one reason or another, attain the training necessary for what are currently higher paying jobs.  Those of us on the right hand side of the bell curve/s (of intelligence, behavior, mental health, circumstances, etc.) typically avoid reflecting on what’s going on on the left hand side, and there are definitely millions of people on it!  I’m thrilled for those who cross over from the left to the right, but I’ve also seen people cross in the other direction.

That isn’t to say that I think employers should have to hire and pay lousy employees if it screws with their business. But I do think they have a right to eat and be warm and get a suspicious lump checked out. As do the people who are actually capable of showing up and completing those currently low wage jobs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

Of course there is.  Dh had to fire a recent hire *in the 6 figures* because they just wouldn’t do what they were supposed to do. And that was after making exceptions to the job requirements that the person had requested in the interview. I’ve also had crummy waitresses, cashiers, and the like. In retail, I’ve tried to manage heroin addicts and my own direct boss who came and went as they pleased (probably also on some sort of drugs.) There are, most definitely, people who suck.

But, yeah, I do think there are millions of people who can’t, for one reason or another, attain the training necessary for what are currently higher paying jobs.  Those of us on the right hand side of the bell curve/s (of intelligence, behavior, mental health, circumstances, etc.) typically avoid reflecting on what’s going on on the left hand side, and there are definitely millions of people on it!  I’m thrilled for those who cross over from the left to the right, but I’ve also seen people cross in the other direction.

That isn’t to say that I think employers should have to hire and pay lousy employees if it screws with their business. But I do think they have a right to eat and be warm and get a suspicious lump checked out. As do the people who are actually capable of showing up and completing those currently low wage jobs.

I don’t disagree. And we have been supportive of the rare instances of employees with a negative background, who wanted something better and were willing to work. Twice we have hired young men like this. Twice in thirty years. One guy moved up to a salaried position as a foreman; he’s a stand-up guy. The other became quite competant at plumbing and, though he did not have the certifications, dh trusted him to be able to do anything he, a Master Plumber, could do. But, unfortunately that guy got into some bad, bad trouble with the law. So he effed up his whole life. 

My point is, it is not classist to acknowledge the reality that jobs with no barrier to entry are more likely to be sought by people who don’t have their act together enough to gain employment in a job that does have requirements to entry. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Implying that the working poor are just too lazy and childish to bother getting better paid jobs is not only incredibly patronizing, it totally ignores the actual numbers involved here — 42% of American workers earn less than $15/hr. We are talking about tens of millions of workers. Where are the free or low-cost training programs for these tens of millions of people? Where is the free child care for the millions of working mothers making less than $15/hr, so they can get this training? And where are the tens of millions of better paying jobs to employ these newly-trained workers?

 

 

Those training programs are at the community college and at the employer. Use the Pell Grant, or work with the unemployment office if not employed.  In the 1990s, just before the first mass layoffs began, the big employers here were directly telling people not to sit on their laurels - jobs require keeping skills up and learning more.  People ignored that.

Child care is what is always has been...find someone on the opposite shift and barter if a gp or auntie or college student  is not available.  

The jobs are all over.  Many people don't want to take them because it takes a while to move up and frankly they can make more under the table.  

Of your 42% earning less the $15/hr, I'm seeing a lot of people who don't mind..the rest of the compensation, particularly low cost medical, makes up for that AND they get to qualify for bennies they wouldn't qualify for if the salary part was higher.  College tuition and housing subsidies, for ex. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HeighHo said:

 

Those training programs are at the community college and at the employer. Use the Pell Grant, or work with the unemployment office if not employed.  In the 1990s, just before the first mass layoffs began, the big employers here were directly telling people not to sit on their laurels - jobs require keeping skills up and learning more.  People ignored that.

Child care is what is always has been...find someone on the opposite shift and barter if a gp or auntie or college student  is not available.  

The jobs are all over.  Many people don't want to take them because it takes a while to move up and frankly they can make more under the table.  

Of your 42% earning less the $15/hr, I'm seeing a lot of people who don't mind..the rest of the compensation, particularly low cost medical, makes up for that AND they get to qualify for bennies they wouldn't qualify for if the salary part was higher.  College tuition and housing subsidies, for ex. 

*For some people*, you’re right. Those things are tickets out. But we have to stop pretending everyone has that access and ability!

My mom is 66 years old and putting off retirement to hang on to benefits.  Her retirement accounts took major hits that cannot be fully recovered. 15 years of layoffs, changes in ownership, etc. have cut her salary to half of what it was, dipping below a living wage, and then there’s the medical bills of an older couple (one medically unable to work full time.). She works in a major metropolitan area, where she had more than one lengthy period of being unable to get hired, despite plenty of experience and keeping up to date on skills. Her latest change in ownership did keep her salary, but increased her responsibilities.

How long should I tell her it will take to move up?  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

*For some people*, you’re right. Those things are tickets out. But we have to stop pretending everyone has that access and ability!

My mom is 66 years old and putting off retirement to hang on to benefits.  Her retirement accounts took major hits that cannot be fully recovered. 15 years of layoffs, changes in ownership, etc. have cut her salary to half of what it was, dipping below a living wage, and then there’s the medical bills of an older couple (one medically unable to work full time.). She works in a major metropolitan area, where she had more than one lengthy period of being unable to get hired, despite plenty of experience and keeping up to date on skills. Her latest change in ownership did keep her salary, but increased her responsibilities.

How long should I tell her it will take to move up?  

 

Who doesn't have access?  There is a community college and a library accessible to everyone in the US. 

 

  Almost everyone in my area is below living wage...its 89k now.  There is no rent control, but there is a senior citizen property tax reduction (its about $5k for people who still have the big house).  Most people couldnt qualify to buy their own home if they were to sell in their peak earning years, they are literally stuck in their home and can't size down.   The people who have that living wage are commuting from NYC. People that work locally are doubled up in housing, or renting out rooms if they didn't inherit or buy long ago. That's something your mom can investigate as a supplement to income -- for my mil, she could actually rent her home out and live in an apt and come out $500 a month ahead, just due to the subsidies seniors get.  She'd be a 1000 a month ahead if she stayed and rented two rooms out. 

   I encourage you to have your mother help herself.  The first thing she has to realize is productivity improvements mean she is going to have increased responsibilities.  I saw this with mil....she had to accept the computer training her employer offered, or get out..she was literally 1/4 as productive as the other people her age who had transitioned...and everyone of them was asking the boss for more hours -- her hours -- as the PC and software updates increased their efficiency.  She eventually lost the job, at age 76, because she wouldn't transition.  Time in current job has nothing to do with moving up -- its skill set and availability of the job. She may have to go into self-employment.  I know several people laid off at 53 who did, and they are doing quite well because they moved on in their minds.

Medical bills of an older couple may take a medicare advantage plan or working for an employer who offers better medical. Perhaps you can help her with the legwork.

Edited by HeighHo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Quill said:

Of course not. Obviously, someone with a proven track record does not need to go get papers late in life. 

Your middle paragraph is the reason I disagree with those (very prevalent in homeschooling circles particularly) who poo-poo getting a college degree, steer their kids towards not pursuing a degree and simplstically say they can go to college later if need be. I have been to college as a mom/adult and it’s hard. It’s a lot of juggling and it’s hard to balance what my kids need with what I want for myself and it’s all too easy to back-burner my degree at this point in life. 

 

But, you shouldn't need a degree in many jobs. There is no reason for a college degree in my job, and those who have been the worst employees have college degrees. 

Daycare is already so expensive and sparse where I live that if you required all of the employees to have college degrees, hardly anyone would be able to send their kids to them. They already cost around $2000 a month for infant care, and we live in an area with a high cost of living and lower than necessary wages. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Quill said:

Are you denying that there is such a thing as a poor-quality employee? Are you trying to say that millions of people fail to pursue certification, degrees or training in a field through no fault of their own? That’s a load of bull. 

I never said there's no such thing as a poor quality employee.  In fact, I gave examples of them.  I said whether they are a poor quality employee or not has nothing to do with creditials or lack of them.

There are tons of people who don’t care about working much or would rather watch TV and drink a beer or who don’t have enough long view to think through what they hope to be doing six months from now, or two years, or four. I’m not talking about a theoretical low wage earner, I’m talking about literal people who my husband attempted to hire for a no-degree-needed job, or my friend in the same position. You know how easy it is to find an alert, mentally together, reliable, non-substance-abusing person who wants to be a plumber’s helper? It’s like trying to find a freaking unicorn. That’s not classist; it’s our actual, lived reality. 

It is classist to claim any of that is a poor people issue or a specific to those who do not have a degree/certified issue.  Because it flat out is not.  The opiod epidemic is called n epidemic for a reason, so no, I'm not at all surprised by that.  My husband sees it in degree only positions in corporate as well.

I’m NOT saying all the white collar employees are always perfect, while the unskilled labor is always dreadful. But a person who goes to the effort of completing a program of training, or a college degree program, is manifestly able to work with some diligence for a defined period of time in order to accomplish what he set out to do. This does weed out the people who can’t/won’t work at something for a period of time to accomplish a fixed goal. 

Except it doesn't.  My husband sees it all the time.  Anyone who works in HR is going to tell you a degree doesn't seem to be the defining work ethic/not a druggie difference.  It's not like there aren't any people who stay in school because they don't want to get a real job or move out of moms basement.  It's not like there aren't lots of people who leave college to the shock that is the reality of employment.  At best it says they may have liked college enough to stick with it.  It has nothing to do with whether they will show up for work on time.  This very forum has had lengthy discussions about students who seem to slide by in college with a rather cavalier attitude about deadlines, schedules, and work quality.  As the old  joke goes, you know what you call the guy who graduated last in medical school? You call him doctor same as all the rest who graduated.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'll repeat, I am NOT one of those home schoolers you reference.  I encourage my kids hard to go to college. Even if they suck at it.  Because classism is real.  I currently have dh, myself, and three kids in college.  I am not at all anti-college.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2019 at 4:31 PM, Ottakee said:

I wish that ALL workers could be paid a basic living wage of some sort.  This is off on a tangent but I think we could go a long ways as a society but having people earn a living wage and giving them the power to then decide where to live, how to spend their money, etc.  I work as a special education substitute teacher (with a 5 year degree) and I make less per hour than my special needs daughter does at Walmart.  Neither of which is a living wage.


And as long as we're wishing - I wish we stopped feeling the need to title jobs as skilled or unskilled.

Cleaning (and doing it well) requires executive function.  It requires knowing what needs to be done, making a plan, executing it, and doing it well.  I understand the OP was attempting to discern and define the terms, and did so quite effectively, however, maybe these are long outdated terms.  There are people who have graduate degrees who are rather unskilled in their positions comparatively, and then there are those who fill "unskilled" positions who are quite skilled and gifted in their area of expertise.

All this need to clearly define and put in boxes... Hmm...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:


And as long as we're wishing - I wish we stopped feeling the need to title jobs as skilled or unskilled.

Cleaning (and doing it well) requires executive function.  It requires knowing what needs to be done, making a plan, executing it, and doing it well.  I understand the OP was attempting to discern and define the terms, and did so quite effectively, however, maybe these are long outdated terms.  There are people who have graduate degrees who are rather unskilled in their positions comparatively, and then there are those who fill "unskilled" positions who are quite skilled and gifted in their area of expertise.

All this need to clearly define and put in boxes... Hmm...

 

Right? I'm sitting here on a board like many other boards where questions about how to get our crap together so that our own houses are clean and organized is a very regular topic that people spend millions of dollars in books, tv shows, magazines and more because they can't seem to figure it out.  So don't tell me it's not skilled work.  Obviously it takes more skill or work ethic than a whole lot of folks here are willing to admit despite the evidence of numerous posts lamenting their lack in this category.  I don't read such posts and think those people have character problems because of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Welp. I disagree. When one tries to fill a position and all that is needed for entry into the position is a pulse and the ability to turn up at the job, the people applying for that job are overwhelming likely to be the bottom-of-the-barrel employees. They are the people who can’t or won’t work towards degrees or certification. It’s not classist, it’s just factual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ChocolateReignRemix said:

 

So...if business margins cannot support the additional pay, and those who are working for $7.25 can't make ends meets, then who makes up the difference? 

Hint: it starts with tax and ends with payers via the social safety net (as limited as it may be.)

So the question could also be posed as why should businesses be indirectly subsidized by the taxpayer?  And let's nor pretend these are only small businesses being subsidized.  WalMart and other major corporations benefit even more than the typical small business.  WalMart has been known to even provide employees on how to apply for government assistance.

If we are okay with subsidizing business, then fine.  But that means the constant attacks on the social safety net need to be dropped as well. 

Well are we subsidizing businesses that offer jobs to people with very limited skills/experience, or are we subsidizing people who have not (or not yet) developed the skills and experience needed to land a better job?  I mean if those jobs for those people went away, would those people be qualified for higher-paying jobs?  If so, they should go take them.  WalMart is not a monopoly.  Why are people willing to work at WalMart in this time of near full employment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kdsuomi said:

 

But, you shouldn't need a degree in many jobs. There is no reason for a college degree in my job, and those who have been the worst employees have college degrees. 

Daycare is already so expensive and sparse where I live that if you required all of the employees to have college degrees, hardly anyone would be able to send their kids to them. They already cost around $2000 a month for infant care, and we live in an area with a high cost of living and lower than necessary wages. 

Well, I’m one of those rare people who believe requiring college degrees is worthwhile for many jobs. The purpose of a college degree is not and never has been job training. It is to make one a well-educated person, with a broad knowledge base and a lot of experience interacting with other people, including asshats; learning how to deliver required information, learning to communicate effectively, learning to problem-solve. 

As I said, I believe (cannot swear to it, but I think) one cannot be an official daycare teacher (not a home daycare) with no degree where I live. I think you have to have at least an Associates in Child Development. At facilities, I expect at least one lead teacher has to have a Bachelor’s. The tuition does not increase just because the staff has degrees, which is exactly what I was saying I perceive as a problem. 

Yes, childcare is crazy, nuts expensive; it is a big reason why some moms (or dads) decide to SAH. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Right? I'm sitting here on a board like many other boards where questions about how to get our crap together so that our own houses are clean and organized is a very regular topic that people spend millions of dollars in books, tv shows, magazines and more because they can't seem to figure it out.  So don't tell me it's not skilled work.  Obviously it takes more skill or work ethic than a whole lot of folks here are willing to admit despite the evidence of numerous posts lamenting their lack in this category.  I don't read such posts and think those people have character problems because of it.

Not saying that many maids don't have EF skills, but it is not a given.  Cleaning is a collection of tasks that are mostly dependent on elbow grease rather than intellect.  Someone manages who does what, and it isn't always the cleaner her/himself.  Some cleaners who are "on their own" take years, even decades to get some things right, if they ever do.  As the person paying one such cleaner, I manage around her EF problems by rearranging my house before she arrives so she doesn't have the opportunity to make certain mistakes; and rearranging again after she leaves; and accepting the fact that certain things will only be done right a minority of the time.  And I put up with the fact that she doesn't have a phone or a bank account half of the time because of her EF issues; not to mention her unreliability as far as whether / when she will arrive.  And she is actually fairly typical of people I know in the long-term cleaning business.  Dare I say there is a reason most of them clean for a living and it isn't love for the job.  (But I certainly appreciate their very hard work.  I just decline to call it more than what it is.)

I myself am pretty good at cleaning - I just don't do it much any more for reasons other than skills.  I understand what it means to be skilled at managing the job of cleaning.  And I can say that, just like not every McDonald's employee is a talented chef, not every cleaner is a talented household manager, not by a long shot.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the cost of living here, the limited childcare options, the price of childcare, of the low wages, people here tend to either move out of the area when having children or just don't have any (when not a high earner and have no family willing to take care of the children). Requiring a college degree will make the wage go up for the employees, and most Head Starts do require degrees. My mom was only able to get the job because people here don't want it for what they're willing to pay (over $14 an hour).

I learned all of the above listed skills by living life and working retail, not going to college. Going to college these days in no way teaches critical thinking and how to deal with jerks. Many of those I know with degrees are worse at those skills than many of those I know who didn't get degrees. Generalizing that those who finish college have all of those skills cuts out so many wonderful employees who just may not have had the same opportunities in life. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

Who doesn't have access?  There is a community college and a library accessible to everyone in the US. 

 

  Almost everyone in my area is below living wage...its 89k now.  There is no rent control, but there is a senior citizen property tax reduction (its about $5k for people who still have the big house).  Most people couldnt qualify to buy their own home if they were to sell in their peak earning years, they are literally stuck in their home and can't size down.   The people who have that living wage are commuting from NYC. People that work locally are doubled up in housing, or renting out rooms if they didn't inherit or buy long ago. That's something your mom can investigate as a supplement to income -- for my mil, she could actually rent her home out and live in an apt and come out $500 a month ahead, just due to the subsidies seniors get.  She'd be a 1000 a month ahead if she stayed and rented two rooms out. 

   I encourage you to have your mother help herself.  The first thing she has to realize is productivity improvements mean she is going to have increased responsibilities.  I saw this with mil....she had to accept the computer training her employer offered, or get out..she was literally 1/4 as productive as the other people her age who had transitioned...and everyone of them was asking the boss for more hours -- her hours -- as the PC and software updates increased their efficiency.  She eventually lost the job, at age 76, because she wouldn't transition.  Time in current job has nothing to do with moving up -- its skill set and availability of the job. She may have to go into self-employment.  I know several people laid off at 53 who did, and they are doing quite well because they moved on in their minds.

Medical bills of an older couple may take a medicare advantage plan or working for an employer who offers better medical. Perhaps you can help her with the legwork.

This is such a condescending and rude post.  Just wow.  Carries mom IS helping herself.  Did you see the part where she is still working at age 66 and all the other struggles that SHE did not cause and has no control over.  She is 66 years old.....do you really think this is the time to be switching jobs in order to get better medical?

And your poor MIL...I hope she has other people in her life to give her care and concern.  It can’t be easy to still be working at age 76 and then to be let go because she ‘wouldn’t’ transition.  Good grief.  

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preschool in my area is mostly switching over to being provided by the school district (UPK). It requires a master’s degree.

Since kids are expected to read in K now a days, and preK classes have 20 kids (many who have disabilities & severe behavior issues), actually requiring degreed teachers is a pretty good idea, IMO.

The district I work in has our preK rooms staffed by a teacher with a master’s degree, a special Ed teacher with a master’s degree, a speech therapist with a master’s degree, & a OT and PT with PHd’s (That’s the bare minimum allowed by our state for those certificates), and a classroom aide who makes minimum wage but deserves gold. And it takes all of us to keep things going.

There is a big difference between babysitting, daycare, and preschool. All should be paid more than they are, but to suggest that quality preschools could be run by a few teenagers is out of touch with today’s schools expectations.

(we do still have a vo tech preschool program locally staffed by teens, but the head teacher and assistant are certified teachers)

Edited by Hilltopmom
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SKL said:

Well are we subsidizing businesses that offer jobs to people with very limited skills/experience, or are we subsidizing people who have not (or not yet) developed the skills and experience needed to land a better job?  I mean if those jobs for those people went away, would those people be qualified for higher-paying jobs?  If so, they should go take them.  WalMart is not a monopoly.  Why are people willing to work at WalMart in this time of near full employment?

 

For starters, near full employment is a bit misleading.  The unemployment rate is calculated in a consistent measure and for that reason is a solid measure of trends over time, but it doesn't account for underemployment.  It should also be noted WalMart employs around 1.4 million people in the United States.  Considering a fair number of those are in areas with limited employment opportunities, I am not sure where you think that many people can find employment elsewhere.

Not to be trite, but as noted in "Caddyshack", the world needs ditch diggers too.  Our labor market consists of X number of jobs that may be unskilled but still require a person willing to do them.  As long as the number of those seeking work >>> number of available jobs, those on the unskilled side of the labor market will be on the low end of wages.  As a society we then have to decide how we are going to treat the least of us.  Personally I think whether someone is bagging my groceries, doing the landscaping in my neighborhood, or cleaning houses, anyone who is working full time should be able to afford to put a roof over their heads, food on the table, and live a decent life.

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scarlett said:

This is such a condescending and rude post.  Just wow.  Carries mom IS helping herself.  Did you see the part where she is still working at age 66 and all the other struggles that SHE did not cause and has no control over.  She is 66 years old.....do you really think this is the time to be switching jobs in order to get better medical?

And your poor MIL...I hope she has other people in her life to give her care and concern.  It can’t be easy to still be working at age 76 and then to be let go because she ‘wouldn’t’ transition.  Good grief.  

 

Welcome to reality.   

And yes, if you need better medical, you need to do what everyone else does and make the switch. Thoughts & prayers and worrying aren't going to fill the larder.

MIL chose to be let go.  She was offered full time and additional training to brush up her PC skills to what's normal for the 70 and 80 year old co-workers, but turned it down.  She has a different part time job with full medical from the same employer -- one where she can take all day to do something by hand that can be done on the PC in half an hour. Her choice, they don't pay by the hour, but by job completion.  

I don't know why you think 'still working at 76' is rare.  People live to their late 90s.  Many of them live a full life and aren't ready to leave part time work, especially when it comes with full medical as it does in this state.  I know people in their early 90s who are candy stripers at the hospital, and they are pushing stretchers, not passing out tissues.  Part of why they have a long life is they keep busy doing things besides occupying the porch swing.

And really, you're a bit old for ad hominems. Makes it hard to take you seriously.

Edited by HeighHo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

*For some people*, you’re right. Those things are tickets out. But we have to stop pretending everyone has that access and ability!

 

It's also important to remember that education is a solution at the micro level, but has shrinking returns at the macro level.  There are only so many openings for jobs with higher skill levels, and eventually someone has to do the unskilled work.  A landscaping company isn't going to pay you more just because someone has an engineering degree (extreme example obviously).

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, HeighHo said:

 

Welcome to reality.   

And yes, if you need better medical, you need to do what everyone else does and make the switch. Thoughts & prayers and worrying aren't going to fill the larder.

MIL chose to be let go.  She was offered full time and additional training to brush up her PC skills to what's normal for the 70 and 80 year old co-workers, but turned it down.  She has a different part time job with full medical from the same employer -- one where she can take all day to do something by hand that can be done on the PC in half an hour. Her choice, they don't pay by the hour, but by job completion.  

I don't know why you think 'still working at 76' is rare.  People live to their late 90s.  Many of them live a full life and aren't ready to leave part time work, especially when it comes with full medical as it does in this state.  I know people in their early 90s who are candy stripers at the hospital, and they are pushing stretchers, not passing out tissues.  Part of why they have a long life is they keep busy doing things besides occupying the porch swing.

And really, you're a bit old for ad hominems. Makes it hard to take you seriously.

I addressed your rudeness. And I disagree with your position that all anyone needs to do is help themselves solve their problems.  Working at 76 because you have to is far different from full lives of volunteering.  I can’t think of a single person in my very large group of friends and acquaintances who is working in their 70s.  So it isn’t reality in my world.  And if it is a reality in your world I am sad for older people in such dire financial straits they have to work.  

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

Who doesn't have access?  There is a community college and a library accessible to everyone in the US. 

 

This not true.  I live in an area where the closest CC is an hour away.  Do you believe that makes it accessible? 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, ChocolateReignRemix said:

 

It's also important to remember that education is a solution at the micro level, but has shrinking returns at the macro level.  There are only so many openings for jobs with higher skill levels, and eventually someone has to do the unskilled work.  A landscaping company isn't going to pay you more just because someone has an engineering degree (extreme example obviously).

This.

This is why we need a system that pays a living wage for unskilled work.

We need people doing unskilled work and those people deserve decent remuneration for their hard hours of labor.

Education as a ticket out of poverty is not a mass solution.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Quill said:

Welp. I disagree. When one tries to fill a position and all that is needed for entry into the position is a pulse and the ability to turn up at the job, the people applying for that job are overwhelming likely to be the bottom-of-the-barrel employees. They are the people who can’t or won’t work towards degrees or certification. It’s not classist, it’s just factual. 

 

Whether a person can or will work towards a degree or certification is a far cry from saying anyone without certifications and degrees are lazy dope head employees. Which is what you keep saying and THAT is classist bigotry.

Lots of people do not in fact have access to community colleges or libraries.  Roughly half my state doesn't for literally dozens of reasons that have nothing to do with those people's work ethic or general character.

Lots of people have very reasonable things that keep them from going to college or getting certifications at any age. For the majority of those people, it has nothing to do with their character or their work ethic.  The vast majority of people working at or below the poverty level do have jobs and work very hard for what little it gets them in life.

This delusion that the medical benefits or other perks make up for the pay is bullshit statistically bc those benefits and perks rarely exist at all in low pay situations and certainly not in a quantity to make up for the low pay. There is literally nothing in the data to back up such a nonsense claim.

If you have a high turn over and difficulty keeping employees it's likely because the work is crap and the pay isn't much better, in which case, hells yeah the smart thing to do should the opportunity present itself is to leave that job asap should another opportunity that might net better for them present itself. That's not crappy work ethic.  That's employees doing exactly what employers are doing in paying them crap wages and refusing to support social policies that would assist more people in the community - it's the employee looking out for their own bottom line.  Employers want employee loyalty and devotion and they call that work ethic.  It's not work ethic.  It's stupidity to be loyal and devoted to people who think you are a worthless bottom of the barrel person unless you come rubber stamped certified.  Especially in today's work culture where young employees are told at graduation that they should expect that they are unlikely to be working for the same company for longer than 5 years and should plan to have 2-4 complete career changes in their lifetime, with few career exceptions. And at a time when many college graduates aren't making squat and are just as likely to be working at Starbucks as anyone's else.

If you have a problem with that, maybe it's time you adjusted to current times or change your business field.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

Who doesn't have access?  There is a community college and a library accessible to everyone in the US. 

 

34 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

This not true.  I live in an area where the closest CC is an hour away.  Do you believe that makes it accessible? 

Mine’s only a half hour away (and that’s the satellite campus, not main) and it can be hard. Particularly for people who, you know, need to support themselves by working 40+ hours/wk.  And it’s $750/3 credit class (plus books.) 

But what do I know, being raised by an apparently lazy woman who can’t be bothered to get ahead. @@. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChocolateReignRemix said:

 

It's also important to remember that education is a solution at the micro level, but has shrinking returns at the macro level.  There are only so many openings for jobs with higher skill levels, and eventually someone has to do the unskilled work.  A landscaping company isn't going to pay you more just because someone has an engineering degree (extreme example obviously).

 

Yes.  I mentioned that previous too.  I don't care how qualified and great someone would be at being a doctor or an engineer, the system is set up to limit the number of people accepted into such programs specifically to assure a demand that will give higher incomes.  This is true of nearly all well paid professions and in those it didn't used to be, programs sprung up to prevent a glut of professionals and protect higher wages. For example, nursing didn't used to be so difficult to get into.  Now it is.  And jobs that don't require a degree are not necessarily free to learn either.  Having a trade often requires expensive training, tools, licensing, insurances, overhead and more.  It might be less than an MD, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily affordable or more attainable either.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Scarlett said:

I addressed your rudeness. And I disagree with your position that all anyone needs to do is help themselves solve their problems.  Working at 76 because you have to is far different from full lives of volunteering.  I can’t think of a single person in my very large group of friends and acquaintances who is working in their 70s.  So it isn’t reality in my world.  And if it is a reality in your world I am sad for older people in such dire financial straits they have to work.  

 

 

Exactly.  There's no way someone in their 70s can do the work, desk or physical, or someone in their 30s.  There's a few exceptions, but over all that's just a fact of nature.  Because of that, it's rare for them to not be pushed into retirement by whatever company they work for and to have a very difficult time convincing someone else to hire them.

I am not sad for anyone who is working and mostly am glad they can. But for the huge amount of our population that lives paycheck to paycheck, and know that is unlikely to ever change no matter how hard they work, for those people it saddens me that we demand they work 40+ hrs a week until the day they die.  No one ever wants to die and have their eulogy be, "He had a great work ethic.  He worked to the day he died at a job that didn't pay crap, for a society that never gave a damn thing back to him, but wow he never missed work.  Sure he missed almost everything about his kids growing up and ended up divorced due to unending financial stress.  But hey, what a guy, he was always on time, and had a great work ethic!💪"

Life and society is about relationships.  That's the only thing we leave behind when we die and the only thing we take with us into the hereafter.

Edited by Murphy101
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carrie12345 said:

<snip>

But what do I know, being raised by an apparently lazy woman who can’t be bothered to get ahead. @@. 

Yeah, Carrie, tell your mom to get it together, willya?

(Sarcasm if you weren't sure.)

Our CC campus is only 8 miles away, but public transit is nearly worthless so it's difficult to impossible for people who don't have access to a car.  With fees it's $191 per credit plus books, so cheaper than some, more expensive than others.  Fortunately some instructors have clued in to the fact that textbooks are a huge racket, and are using alternatives which are lower cost and sometimes even no cost at all.   

We could all point to someone with seemingly insurmountable obstacles who made it work out, and then use that as a club to beat up others who didn't have whatever it was - luck, grit, determination, whatever - that the successful person had. There are a lot of factors that go into it and they are not all under a person's control - however much we like to think that it is. 

ETA: luck is probably a poor choice of words. But I'd also add superior intellect. Some people just are smarter/quicker/more academically capable than others.

Edited by marbel
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, marbel said:

Yeah, Carrie, tell your mom to get it together, willya?

(Sarcasm if you weren't sure

Right?!?

Now I’m trying to remember who it was that managed to raised 3 kids as a single parent with no child support. Oh, yeah! Her, a few decades younger!  

Don’t get old, people!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 70 something year old woman should just quite and get another job??? Seriously? In what world is its easy for a person in their 70's to get hired pretty much anywhere? People in their 50s are facing ageism, let alone 70s!

And not wanting to go to full time at 76 years old is hardly something to consider lazy, etc. 

 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

 

I don't know why you think 'still working at 76' is rare.  People live to their late 90s.  Many of them live a full life and aren't ready to leave part time work, especially when it comes with full medical as it does in this state.  I know people in their early 90s who are candy stripers at the hospital, and they are pushing stretchers, not passing out tissues.  Part of why they have a long life is they keep busy doing things besides occupying the porch swing.

And really, you're a bit old for ad hominems. Makes it hard to take you seriously.

 

As of 2002 less than 5% of those age 75 or older were still working.  The number has been growing and and jumped after the 2008 economic debacle and is somewhere around 8-10% now.  I would call that relatively rare.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ChocolateReignRemix said:

 

For starters, near full employment is a bit misleading.  The unemployment rate is calculated in a consistent measure and for that reason is a solid measure of trends over time, but it doesn't account for underemployment.  It should also be noted WalMart employs around 1.4 million people in the United States.  Considering a fair number of those are in areas with limited employment opportunities, I am not sure where you think that many people can find employment elsewhere.

Not to be trite, but as noted in "Caddyshack", the world needs ditch diggers too.  Our labor market consists of X number of jobs that may be unskilled but still require a person willing to do them.  As long as the number of those seeking work >>> number of available jobs, those on the unskilled side of the labor market will be on the low end of wages.  As a society we then have to decide how we are going to treat the least of us.  Personally I think whether someone is bagging my groceries, doing the landscaping in my neighborhood, or cleaning houses, anyone who is working full time should be able to afford to put a roof over their heads, food on the table, and live a decent life.

I never said unskilled workers should not be able to earn a living wage.  There is a difference between unskilled and entry-level.  An unskilled worker who has built up the experience and reputation of a reliable and productive worker is not an entry-level worker and should earn a living wage.  There are many unskilled jobs that pay pretty well.  But not every unskilled person has proven himself qualified for the jobs that pay well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Scarlett said:

This not true.  I live in an area where the closest CC is an hour away.  Do you believe that makes it accessible? 

 

Yep. And so does my school district. There is no transportation for the students who have DE at the CC as the only option besides study hall..as sixteen year old new drivers, they get to learn to handle ice by driving in to the CC daily in winter.

Keep in mind high schoolers in NYC travel more than an hour to school; commutes are normal.  

Why do you think driving to the CC is the only way to earn a certificate or degree? Does your state not have online options?

Edited by HeighHo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ChocolateReignRemix said:

 

As of 2002 less than 5% of those age 75 or older were still working.  The number has been growing and and jumped after the 2008 economic debacle and is somewhere around 8-10% now.  I would call that relatively rare.

You are citing above the table and full time.

Edited by HeighHo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, in my head, Heigh Ho lives in a yankee version of Lake Woebegone, where all the children are above average but none get any classes except study hall, while driving on the ice uphill both ways, hoping to avoid the rush hour of 70-80 year olds working under the table jobs while collecting huge pensions and never paying any property taxes. 

I don't mean I don't believe you, Heigh Ho, but wherever you live just seems so vastly different than anywhere I've lived, or people I know have lived, or even people on this board have experience. It's like another planet to me. 

  • Like 7
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

At this point, in my head, Heigh Ho lives in a yankee version of Lake Woebegone, where all the children are above average but none get any classes except study hall, while driving on the ice uphill both ways, hoping to avoid the rush hour of 70-80 year olds working under the table jobs while collecting huge pensions and never paying any property taxes. 

I don't mean I don't believe you, Heigh Ho, but wherever you live just seems so vastly different than anywhere I've lived, or people I know have lived, or even people on this board have experience. It's like another planet to me. 

 

Pretty close.  Mountain terrain, four seasons, old timers, great govt pensions (LIRR back in the news again and this round they have a commission to investigate), fantastic school tax exemptions for favored groups, no transportation to CC for compelled students.  Tammany Hall wasn't far from here, physically or mentally.

on the school, the only people in study hall are those from cultures who value achievement and don't go to private school. plenty of remedial, sn, and ESL coursework for the other 60%..  Its been interesting, the slide was documented by Stanford and the state gov as 2.5 grade levels of achievement on the whole since they knocked off IB and most of AP/honors.  We're tame though, the militant people are in districts where the people who took over the school board are busy making it so the minority can't have enough req'd coursework to grad in 4. 

You might consider getting out more and looking under the covers.  Politics in action is fascinating. I have learned so much from Pam in CT that applies to local politics in diverse communities.

Edited by HeighHo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

At this point, in my head, Heigh Ho lives in a yankee version of Lake Woebegone, where all the children are above average but none get any classes except study hall, while driving on the ice uphill both ways, hoping to avoid the rush hour of 70-80 year olds working under the table jobs while collecting huge pensions and never paying any property taxes. 

I don't mean I don't believe you, Heigh Ho, but wherever you live just seems so vastly different than anywhere I've lived, or people I know have lived, or even people on this board have experience. It's like another planet to me. 

I was surprised by the 16yos. It’s rare around here for them to have their own vehicle dedicated to their own schedule.  It’s also not hugely common for our district to produce DE students.

My own teens get chauffeured around to pricey classes (DE is discounted, but not free) and various opportunities by their sahm and flexible-hours dad, and are eligible thanks to their highly personalized education.  They are extremely privileged, and they know it. Being related to and friends with people from a wide range of backgrounds, they see the different challenges that exist in life/the world/the US/their area. They’re very much aware that their situation isn’t exactly “normal”.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

Yep. And so does my school district. There is no transportation for the students who have DE at the CC as the only option besides study hall..as sixteen year old new drivers, they get to learn to handle ice by driving in to the CC daily in winter.

Keep in mind high schoolers in NYC travel more than an hour to school; commutes are normal.  

Why do you think driving to the CC is the only way to earn a certificate or degree? Does your state not have online options?

 

Because driving is still the only way the majority of the time.  Online has come a long way but not so far that an entire degree in any field is available anywhere for free. That’s just not the case. And online is often still subpar to classroom. That’s getting better in some places but it’s still not the standard yet.

Edited by Murphy101
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HeighHo said:

You are citing above the table and full time.

 

Oh geez. Whatever. 🙄

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

I was surprised by the 16yos. It’s rare around here for them to have their own vehicle dedicated to their own schedule.  It’s also not hugely common for our district to produce DE students.

My own teens get chauffeured around to pricey classes (DE is discounted, but not free) and various opportunities by their sahm and flexible-hours dad, and are eligible thanks to their highly personalized education.  They are extremely privileged, and they know it. Being related to and friends with people from a wide range of backgrounds, they see the different challenges that exist in life/the world/the US/their area. They’re very much aware that their situation isn’t exactly “normal”.

 

Me too. Most of my kids don’t even have their own cellphone or laptop, they sure don’t all have their own cars or all of that at 16.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Because driving is still the only way the majority of the time.  Online has come a long way but not so far that an entire degree in any field is available anywhere for free. That’s just not the case. And online is often still subpar to classroom. That’s getting better in some places but it’s still not the standard yet.

Not to mention, in many rural areas, mine included, internet is too spotty for online classes, streaming, etc. And the community college classes are far away and sparse.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, HeighHo said:

 

Yep. And so does my school district. There is no transportation for the students who have DE at the CC as the only option besides study hall..as sixteen year old new drivers, they get to learn to handle ice by driving in to the CC daily in winter.

Keep in mind high schoolers in NYC travel more than an hour to school; commutes are normal.  

Why do you think driving to the CC is the only way to earn a certificate or degree? Does your state not have online options?

For a high school student, commuting by public transportation in NYC is very different than a new driver having access to a car and gas money to drive in all conditions to CC classes in rural areas. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...