Posts Tagged Bureau of Labor Statistics
Recession hit older tech workers harder, labor data shows – Computerworld
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Employment on August 23, 2012
Recession hit older tech workers harder, labor data shows
Older women in computer, math jobs face unemployment rates near 10%
By Patrick Thibodeau and Sharon Machlis
Computerworld - Unemployment rates for older IT workers increased during the recession faster than they did for younger employees, according to new U.S. government labor data obtained by Computerworld. But that’s something that Maribeth McIntyre, an IT professional with some 30 years of experience, already suspected.
McIntyre was laid off from her job of seven years in early 2007 at age 55. Until that layoff, finding a job had “always been as easy it can be,” so she hit the then still-growing pre-recession IT job market to look for a new job in her area of expertise: as a business system analyst and project manager specializing in HR and payroll applications.
In 2007, McIntyre said she had two or three phone interviews a week and many in-person interviews that were often enthusiastic and seemingly successful. But it was eight months before she landed a consulting job. “I was beginning to suspect it was an age problem,” she said.
What is certain is that unemployment for people 55 years and older has become a problem, especially during the past two years. In the U.S. government’s “computer and mathematical occupations” category, the overall unemployment rate jumped from 6% to 8.4% from 2009 to 2010, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. For women 55 and older, the unemployment rate hit 9.4%. For men in that age group, it was 8%.
Meanwhile, unemployment declined for workers in that category who were between 25 and 54, dropping from 5.1% in 2009 to 4.5% in 2010 (see chart below).
The recession ended McIntyre’s consulting job, so she found contract work for a few months in 2009 and last year landed a six-month contract gig that recently ended.
McIntyre, who keeps an online journal on the Daily Kos Web site (under the name Embee), had noticed other older workers talking about the problem of finding work. Seeing a trend, she started an online forum called the “50+ and Unemployed (Underemployed) Support Group” this month and got lots of positive feedback about the endeavor.
McIntyre said the forum is for sharing ideas and venting, because “after a while, your friends don’t want to hear it anymore,” she said with a laugh.
Although the labor data confirmed what McIntyre believed to be the case about the labor market, it didn’t stop her from calling the unemployment numbers for older workers “scary.”
U.S. unemployment rates
2009-2010
|
|
25-54 yrs. |
55+ yrs. |
All 16+ |
|
|||
|
|
2009 |
2010 |
2009 |
2010 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
|
Total population |
8.2 |
8.5 |
6.5 |
7.0 |
8.6 |
8.9 |
|
|
All professional |
4.2 |
4.1 |
4.3 |
4.6 |
4.4 |
4.5 |
|
|
All computer & math |
5.1 |
4.5 |
6.0 |
8.4 |
5.2 |
5.2 |
|
|
Architecture & engineering |
6.2 |
5.2 |
9.9 |
9.4 |
6.9 |
6.2 |
|
|
Life, physical, social science |
4.3 |
4.2 |
4.0 |
5.5 |
4.5 |
4.6 |
|
|
Community & social service |
3.8 |
4.7 |
4.3 |
2.9 |
4.3 |
4.6 |
|
|
Legal |
3.6 |
2.7 |
2.8 |
2.3 |
3.4 |
2.7 |
|
|
Education, training, library |
3.8 |
4.1 |
3.7 |
3.6 |
4.1 |
4.2 |
|
|
Health |
2.3 |
2.3 |
2.1 |
2.7 |
2.3 |
2.5 |
|
|
Arts, entertainment, sports, media |
8.0 |
8.1 |
7.4 |
8.4 |
8.4 |
8.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male all |
9.1 |
9.2 |
7.0 |
7.7 |
9.7 |
9.8 |
|
|
Male professional |
4.5 |
4.3 |
4.6 |
5.1 |
4.8 |
4.9 |
|
|
Male computer & math |
5.1 |
4.3 |
4.9 |
8.0 |
5.1 |
5.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Female all |
7.0 |
7.6 |
6.0 |
6.2 |
7.4 |
7.9 |
|
|
Female professional |
4.0 |
4.0 |
4.1 |
4.1 |
4.2 |
4.2 |
|
|
Female computer & math |
5.2 |
5.1 |
8.9 |
9.4 |
5.7 |
5.7 |
|
Rates are percentage of total workers in each category. Data comes from the federal Current Population Survey of about 50,000 U.S. households conducted monthly. Margin of error for these demographic slices was unavailable. Workers are counted in a profession’s unemployment pool only if their previous job was in that field and if they’ve been in the workforce within the past few years, thus factoring out both new graduates and those who have been out of the workforce for some time.
Nanci Schimizzi, the president of Women in Technology, a mentoring and advocacy group, said she knows a number of women who are 50 or older and are looking for work.
“They remain unemployed for long periods of time — years — to the point where many of them have more or less given up” and gone into alternate careers, said Schimizzi, who works in technology operations at an organization she asked not be named.
Four years ago, before the economic downturn, unemployment for computer and math professionals was 3.5% for men 55 and over and 4.2% for women the same age. The overall rate for younger professionals — between the ages of 25 and 54 — was just 1.7%.
Older workers, particularly when a company is changing its systems, can “find themselves highly paid, without the needed skills, and then they are the easiest targets,” said Schimizzi.
Schimizzi said she isn’t expecting the unemployment rate for older workers to decline, even when hiring picks up. If employers do hire older workers, it is likely to be for short-term contracts, she said. “I think full-time positions are going to be staffed from the younger workforce.”
Al Williams, vice president of Share, an independent IBM user group and a director of IT at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, Pa., said people who are over 50 may face problems if they resist change. But the fact that they’re likely to have higher salaries than their younger colleagues may put them at risk, too.
“I think the biggest risk in IT is we tend to define ourselves with the technology we like, rather than aligning ourselves with the strategies the business needs,” said Williams.
Overall, the jobless rate for workers in computer and math fields was 5.2% last year, unchanged from 2009. Average unemployment for all professional occupations was 4.5%, with the lowest levels in the health and legal occupations, according to the government data. Architects and engineers had a higher unemployment rate, and those in the arts, entertainment, sports and media fared the worst.
IT job employment has been picking up, and the jobs that are most in demand favor young as well as older workers, according to Todd Thibodeaux, president and CEO of the Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA), which runs a large IT skills certification program.
Thibodeaux says there is high demand for IT workers, particularly for those who can build mobile applications, work on a combination of security andcloud computing platforms, and handle cloud integration generally. People familiar with various cloud platforms, such as those run by Google, Amazon and Microsoft, as well as healthcare specialists and electronic medical records integrators, are also in demand.
While the mobile realm favors the young, “cloud and healthcare may be favoring older and more seasoned workers,” said Thibodeaux.
The age issue is likely to gain importance because of the sheer size of the baby boom generation — people born between 1946 and 1964, who make up more than 25% of the U.S. population and a substantial segment of the IT workforce. The federal government reports that people between 45 and 63 years of age accounted for 60% of its IT workforce in 2008, according to a federal study last year.
Farrokh Hormozi, a professor of economics and public administration at Pace University in New York, said the unemployment rates for older workers are what he would have expected.
“Older people have less opportunity to get back to the job market than younger people,” said Hormozi, who tracks IT employment in the New York region as co-investigator of the Pace SkillProof IT Index.
The only time when older people could go into the job market and readily find work was during the boom years of the mid-1990s leading up to 2000, he said. “If you discount those years, the labor market has not been acting unexpectedly,” said Hormozi.
“I hate to say it is human nature,” said Hormozi, but “you always want to give an opportunity to younger people.”
Recession hit older tech workers harder, labor data shows – Computerworld.
Related articles
- BYOD makes employees work extra 20 hours unpaid – ComputerworldUK.com (mbcalyn.com)
- Older and out of work (charlotteobserver.com)
- Real Simple Math Puts The Real US Unemployment Rate At 49% (alexanderhiggins.com)
- Why you’re a fool to believe the government’s official unemployment numbers (thedailycrux.com)
- State Unemployment Rates Mostly Steady in July (dailyfinance.com)
- Jobs Created by Startup Companies Have Long-Lasting Economic Impact (kauffman.org)
- Recession Job Loss is Reversible, Fed Studies Show (bloomberg.com)
- Older workers face a tougher road (goerie.com)
- Jobless rate for region hits 9%, highest in 22 years (buffalonews.com)
- Labor expert sees Greek recession next year at 5%, unemployment at 29% (ekathimerini.com)
Farron Cousins | House Republicans Sacrifice Human Health For Alleged Job Creation
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in GOP, Legislation on August 19, 2012
House Republicans Sacrifice Human Health For Alleged Job Creation

With July 2012 officially behind us, the U.S. jobs report for the month has economists and politicians concerned about the employment situation in America. And even though the economy added 163,000 jobs (economists had predicted only 100,000 jobs to be added for July,) the unemployment rate and the underemployment rate both crept slightly upwards. And with national elections coming up in three months, poor jobs numbers could be bad for our health.
If history is any indicator, Conservative politicians and think tanks will use last month’s poor jobs report in an attempt to provide massive giveaways to their friends in the dirty energy industry. They attempted the same thing after below-average job growth in May of this year, claiming that approval of the Keystone XL pipeline would be the job boon that Americans desperately need.
But Republicans in Washington didn’t wait for a bad jobs report before they started planning their dirty energy bonanza, but its likely they will use it as a catalyst to gain more support for their disastrous plans.
In mid June of this year, Republicans on the “House Energy Action Team” (HEAT) proposed a set of bills that would destroy many of the safeguards that are currently in place to protect our environment and our personal health in order to make things “easier” for businesses to create jobs without worrying about those pesky safety standards. What the package of legislation is really about is repaying HEAT members’ financiers from the dirty energy industry who stand to save a ton of cash by destroying regulations.
The legislation package would remove many current existing safeguards for environmental and public health until the unemployment rate drops below 6%, a rate that hasn’t been seen since July 2008, when it was 5.8%. Since that month four years ago, the rate has stayed consistently above 6%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
When I wrote about the legislative package back in June, I focused mainly on the ties to industry of the bills’ sponsors. Recently, the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards put together an analysis of the safeguards and regulations that the bills would removed if passed:
The House of Representatives will soon consider a radical bill proposed by Republican members: ‘‘Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act’’ (H.R. 4078). This bill is made up of provisions H.R.4078, H.R. 4607, H.R. 3862, H.R. 373, H.R. 4377, H.R. 2308, and H.R. 1840 which would, in an unprecedented move halt all regulatory action on national safeguards that protect the health and safety of Americans and bolster the nation’s economy.
Combined, these provisions would halt or delay virtually ALL regulations and do absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy or new job opportunities. They would shut down crucial safeguards that give Americans confidence in the products at the grocery store, the safety of their workplaces, the cleanliness of the water system, the soundness of our financial system, and the safety of vital infrastructure…
Public Health and Clean Air – These bills would continue to prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from implementing standards defining power plants, industrial boilers, process heaters and cement plants compliance with the Clean Air Act. Those structures are the largest emitters of mercury and toxic air pollutants. Compliance would curb their harmful impact on the respiratory health of millions of Americans.
Food Safety – Each year, 1.2 million people get sick, 7,125 are hospitalized, and 134 die from foodborne illnesses contracted from contaminated produce. Illnesses and food recalls also hurt the U.S.agriculture and food industries. The Food Safety Modernization Act, passed with support from both industry and consumer groups, calls for new regulations on produce handling on large farms and an inspection system for foreign farms to be in place by 2013. Its implementation depends on rulemaking that would be blocked by the proposed bills.
Workplace Safety – Beryllium, a toxic substance (lung cancer and other fatal and chronic diseases) exposed to workers in the electronics, nuclear, and metalwork industries. Current1950s-based standards allow workers to continue to be exposed to levels higher than ruled safe for nuclear power plant workers. The three proposed bills would stop the Occupational Safety and Health Administration from updating exposure standards to protect all workers.
Energy and Environment – The proposed bills would block the U.S. Department of Energy from implementing the Energy Security and Independence Act, delaying for five years updates of energy efficiency standards for a wide range of products. The estimated lost savings for the U.S. economy would be $48 to $105 billion. The bills also would halt the Federal Trade Commission’s rulemaking for energy efficiency labeling designed to protect consumers from misleading and deceptive claims about product energy savings.
In addition to these measures, some of the bills in the package would reduce benefits for our veterans, and loosen the already lenient rules regarding the approval of medical devices in America.
If passed, these laws would sacrifice the lives and well being of American citizens based solely on the hope that companies will create more jobs. To the House Republicans who proposed this legislation, their faith in corporations to “do the right thing” is greater than their belief that every life is sacred and worth protecting.
But the most important thing to remember about their proposals is that they won’t work. As I have pointed out over the years, regulations are not destroying jobs, nor are they hindering job creation. In fact, tightening safeguards would actually lead to greater job creation than destroying regulations.
Talking points aside, House Republicans are also overlooking the fact that destroying safeguards will also have a devastating effect on the fragile U.S. economy. Studies tell us that for every dollar spent on safeguards and regulations, an economic benefit of between four and eight dollars ripples throughout the economy. To put it simply, every dollar spent on regulations has a minimum return of 400% for the U.S. economy. Any investor could see that this would be a wise decision.
In addition to the lost investments, we have to look at the jobs that would be lost by doing away with regulations. Delaying implementation, or doing away with completely, the Clean Air Act standards could cost our economy an estimated 1.5 million jobs.
And those numbers are just the ones on the surface. We would also have to factor in the economic impact of health and environmental degradation that would be placed on the economy if these safeguards were removed. It is a fact that U.S. taxpayers already pay for healthcare costs related to air pollution, estimated to be about $50 billion a year. Environmental costs shifted to taxpayers also total in the billions a year, as seen with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the Exxon Valdez spill (every disaster has costs that are shifted to taxpayers, those are just two of the largest examples.)
And again, all of these costs and dangers that will be imposed on the American public are only in the HOPE that corporate America will create more jobs. After analyzing all of the available information about regulations and job creation, its clear that repealing these safeguards will do little, if anything at all, to spur job growth in America. On the other hand, tightening these safeguards and fully implementing ones that have been delayed would provide an enormous benefit to both our health and our economy. But the dirty energy industry only thinks about their profits, not what happens in the world around them.
Farron Cousins | House Republicans Sacrifice Human Health For Alleged Job Creation.
Related articles
- House Republicans’ New “Job Creation” Bill Creates No Jobs, Increases Workplace Abuses | Alternet (mbcalyn.com)
- House Republicans Sacrifice Human Health For Alleged Job Creation (desmogblog.com)
- Rick Scott in Tampa for release of July jobs report (tbo.com)
- Nurses Unite to Expose Health Risks of Fracking and Fossil Fuel Energy (ecowatch.org)
- Jobs report: US economy still stalled – Washington Post (blog) (washingtonpost.com)
- Rep. Lynn Jenkins Reacts To Jobs Report (wibw.com)
- July California jobs report: Golden State leads the nation (scpr.org)
- California employers add 25200 jobs; unemployment stays at 10.7% (latimes.com)
- The Jobs Mirage and the Election (conservativeread.com)
- House GOP leaders rip Obama over jobs report (politico.com)
End student loans, don’t make them cheaper | StarTribune.com
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Education on June 19, 2012
End student loans, don’t make them cheaper
RICHARD VEDDER , Bloomberg News
Updated: June 18, 2012
We have millions of under-qualified college students borrowing or getting Pell Grants to finance college.

Paul Tong illustration on student debt.
Photo: Paul Tong, Tribune Media Services
· 93
U.S. employers complain that they can’t find enough skilled employees. Then how do we explain why almost 54 percent of recent college graduates are underemployed or unemployed, even in scientific and technical fields, according to a study conducted for the Associated Press by Northeastern University researchers?
The cause is more fundamental than the cycles of the economy: The country is turning out far more college graduates than jobs exist in the areas traditionally reserved for them: the managerial, technical and professional occupations.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics tells us that we now have 115,000 janitors, 83,000 bartenders, 323,000 restaurant servers, and 80,000 heavy-duty truck drivers with bachelor’s degrees – a number exceeding that of uniformed personnel in the U.S. Army.
Was college worth it? A huge part of the problem relates to federal financial-aid programs. Annual student loans, Pell Grants, tax credits and other federal assistance totaled some $169 billion a year in 2010-11 – more than 1 percent of national output. These programs are based on two erroneous premises: that almost everyone needs higher education for vocational success, and that they reduce student costs.
More than 25 years ago, Education Secretary William Bennett argued that federal aid programs benefited colleges more than students. Recent studies by Stephanie Riegg Cellini of George Washington University and Claudia Goldin of Harvard University, as well as by Andrew Gillen for the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, support that hypothesis.
A new study by Nicholas Turner of the Office of Tax Analysis in the U.S. Treasury Department argues that when tax-based aid goes up, institutional scholarships go down, dollar for dollar.
Consequently, we have millions of underqualified college students borrowing or getting Pell Grants to finance college.
More than 40 percent of them don’t even graduate within six years, and many who do have marginal academic records. Because the average college student spends fewer than 30 hours a week on all academic activities, for about 30 weeks a year, never have so many dollars gone to teach so many students for so little vocational gain.
Besides leading to more underemployed college students of increasingly dubious academic quality, the dysfunctional federal student financial assistance programs have other pathologies:
First, universities, unlike the taxpayers, suffer no financial consequences when the underqualified students they have lured into their academic programs ultimately default on their loans.
Second, students who study six years but ultimately drop out receive more financial aid than the diligent “A” student graduating in three years: We reward mediocrity and punish excellence.
Third, there is no adjustment of student-loan interest-rate terms to meet market conditions or differing risk factors relating to individual repayment prospects. That means too much money is lent, especially to high-risk individuals with little prospect for academic success.
Fourth, the Free Application for Federal Student Aid form, associated with these programs, aside from being unbearably complex, gives colleges private information about family finances that allows them to gouge students more.
Fifth, colleges’ tuition and fee policies drive the amount of loan volume, rather than the other way around, thus contributing to the college-cost explosion and the subsequent academic arms race.
Sixth, intended partly to promote greater opportunities for the poor, these federal-aid programs have been accompanied both by rising income inequality in the United States, and a decline in the proportion of recent college graduates from poor families.
Proponents of federal student-loan programs argue that private student-loan markets are underdeveloped, that banks are afraid to lend to students, largely because of their lack of credit history. This argument is vastly overblown. It is amazing how students have no trouble getting credit cards and racking up debt, or little difficulty borrowing to buy a car. Why would college be any different?
Yes, the goal of providing educational opportunity for all seems commendable. Any revamping of the federal student- assistance program would have to be phased in to avoid severe hardship and enrollment disruptions. But here are some better policies:
— The federal government should get out of the student loan business.
— It should provide educational vouchers (similar to Pell Grants) directly to students (not schools), and make those vouchers progressive (very low-income students receive the most, fairly low-income students a little, and middle- and upper- income children nothing).
— Add performance incentives, rewarding timely degree completion and good performance.
— Remove the tuition tax credit that largely assists relatively affluent students and their families; perhaps use savings from all of the above to reduce the budget deficit.
— Eliminate the Free Application for Federal Student Aid form and require that applicants give the Internal Revenue Service permission to provide family-income data.
My guess is that the total number of students attending four-year programs would fall modestly, a good thing given the disconnect between the labor market and college enrollment; that the proportion of students from lower-income families would probably increase (also good) both because the Free Application for Federal Student Aid form is a barrier for lower-income families, and the burden of aid reductions would fall mainly on the colleges and more affluent students.
Also, the total cost to the federal government would drop significantly.
More radical solutions might involve rolling many government-income security programs into compulsory tax- sheltered 401(k)-like lifetime individual security and investment accounts, allowing withdrawals for college costs. However it is done, the current system needs replacing.
End student loans, don’t make them cheaper | StarTribune.com.
Related articles
- How To Get Pell Grants For College (answers.com)
- How To Apply For Pell Grants (answers.com)
- Pay for College – What Is a Pell Grant? (bigfuture.collegeboard.org)
- Reason for pell grant denial (saulfitzsimmon1.typepad.com)
- pell grant international students (malcomschneider.typepad.com)
- Congress pulls plug on Pell Grants; thousands of students affected (mercurynews.com)
- How to fix student loans (salon.com)
- Republican budget: Ryan plan would cost one million students their Pell Grants (dailykos.com)
- Pell Grants plug pulled for thousands of students (mercurynews.com)
- How To Get Financial Aid For College (answers.com)
Law degree loses luster amid weak economy, globalization – Life Inc.
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Employment, Legal on June 14, 2012

Steven Senne / AP file
These 2012 Harvard law school graduates likely face solid prospects, but that is not as true for many newly minted lawyers.
By Allison Linn
Lawyers have sometimes taken a ribbing for what they do, but until recently few questioned why they do it: For the good pay and job security.
You can’t necessarily count on either of those things anymore.
The weak economy, globalization and technological advances have dramatically changed the legal industry, and experts say that’s leaving a glut of lawyers coming out of school with massive student loans, high hopes and few job prospects.
“There’s kind of an over-optimism that feeds the law school market,” said William Henderson, director of the Center on the Global Legal Profession at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law.
The National Association of Law Professionals reported last week the overall employment rate for class of 2011 law school graduates was the worst since 1994, with 85.6 percent of the 41,623 graduates holding a job nine months after graduation.
That may seem like a lot, but it turns out that many of those people don’t have the type of job that might expect after spending so much time and money on a law degree.
A year after getting their degrees only about 65 percent of last year’s law school graduates had a job that required them to have passed the bar, the association found. What’s more, nearly 10 percent were still looking for any job at all.
The longer-term prognosis isn’t so great, either. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that employment of lawyers will grow by only 10 percent between 2010 and 2020, while overall jobs are expected to grow by 14 percent.
The declining prospects come as more and more law firms, and their corporate clients, discover what manufacturers figured out a long time ago: Sometimes it’s cheaper to outsource your work. Experts say many companies now rely on cheaper legal minds in India, the Philippines and elsewhere.
Related: Storied law firm folds after partners flee
“Simple tasks like document review … can now be done in these offshore markets at much lower price points,” said James Leipold, executive director of the National Association of Law Professionals.
Some companies and law firms also are using more contract or temporary workers who cost a lot less than young associates and have little chance of being hired permanently.
The weak economy also has played a role. When companies started to see profits decline at the start of the recession, many took a hard look at their legal expenses and found areas where they could trim fat. Among other things, they told law firms they were no longer willing to pay high hourly rates for the work of young, inexperienced associates.
Henderson, the law professor, said there is also a crop of new legal entrepreneurs who are using technology to do legal work that was once done by hand, at higher cost and with more mistakes.
Those changes mean that big law firms don’t need as many young law school grads. That’s leaving a lot of young lawyers stuck in dead-end, entry-level or less lucrative jobs, or not practicing law at all.
Stephanie Tricomi graduated from Roger Williams University’s law school in 2006 with high hopes that she and her husband, also a law school graduate, would use their degrees for long and lucrative legal careers.
The couple moved from Rhode Island to Florida, she passed the bar exam and was quickly hired as a clerk for trial court judges.
She figured she would do that for a couple years and then move on to a big firm or her own practice, and a fatter paycheck.
“I thought, OK, well, this is a great starting point,” said Tricomi, now 31.
Her husband, meanwhile, thought he would start a career in real estate law, but then the housing market went bust. He ended up deciding to teach high school literature.
In late 2008, Tricomi began looking for a new job but found that few were available. Then, in early 2009, her husband was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer. After a long and costly battle, he died in May 2011.
Six years after graduating from law school, Tricomi is still working as a law clerk, earning about $45,000 a year. She hasn’t had a raise since she started because of a pay freeze, and her own office hasn’t hired anyone since they brought her on.
Tricomi likes her job but she’d like to advance her career. So far, however, she hasn’t had luck finding another job.
Meanwhile, she’s grappling with about $80,000 in student loan debt. She said she gave little thought to the debt she was taking on when she started law school, thinking at the time that her lucrative career would make the loans more than worthwhile.
“You think, oh, well, that’s not that bad. When I come out, I’ll be making $100,000 at least,” she said.
Between regular bills and student loan payments, Tricomi is living paycheck to paycheck. That’s not what most people think when they hear what she does.
“Even now, when I tell people I’m an attorney they say, ‘Oh, you must be rich,’” Tricomi said. “That’s the assumption.”
Some critics blame law schools for the glut of lawyers, arguing they paint too rosy of a picture of life after law school to recruit more students.
The American Bar Association recently made changes aimed at giving a more accurate picture of the market for law school graduates, and how many are really taking home fat paychecks.
The changes come in the wake of harsh criticism from groups such as Law School Transparency. They have argued that law schools have distorted the numbers by hiring grads for a short period of time to bulk up employment numbers, for example, or only including the small sample who responded when reporting stellar average starting salaries.
“Everyone is saying, ‘Oh, law school is a great investment. It’ll be a way to make a lot of money,’” said Kyle McEntee, executive director of Law School Transparency. “It turns out that wasn’t actually true.”
McEntee, who graduated from Vanderbilt Law School in 2011, actually started the project before it became apparent just how much tight the job market was going to get for lawyers. He says he doesn’t want to keep people from going to law school; he just wants them to go in with their eyes open.
“My goal is not to scare people away,” he said. “I just so happen to think that the informed decision is, don’t go.”
Leipold, of the lawyer’s association, thinks it’s possible that the class of 2011 represented the worst of things, and that job prospects will slowly start to improve. But he also said that some of the changes in the legal profession are likely permanent.
“I don’t expect a dramatic turnaround,” he said.
Already, there are signs that some are souring on the prospect of going to law school.
The number of people taking the LSAT, the test required for law school admission, has fallen sharply in each of the past two academic years. A total of 129,958 people took the LSAT in the 2011-2012 academic year, according to the Law School Admission Council.
That’s the lowest number in a decade.
Law degree loses luster amid weak economy, globalization – Life Inc..
Related articles
- Firm Posts Job Opening for Lawyer – Salary $10K a Year (newser.com)
- Why law school is no longer a golden ticket (cbsnews.com)
- Law School Class of 2011 Jobs Data Shows 18-Year Low (blogs.wsj.com)
- How to Become a Lawyer (answers.com)
- A Special Message to Law School Applicants: Why Law School Applicants Should Not Rely on The U.S. News Rankings (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
- Is the solution fewer law students per school or fewer law schools? (professorbainbridge.com)
- Bloomberg: Job Market Gets Even Worse for Law Grads (taxprof.typepad.com)
- UMass Law School wins provisional accreditation (bostonherald.com)
- 9 Graduates Lose Case Against New York Law School (dealbook.nytimes.com)
- For LSAT, Sharp Drop in Popularity for Second Year (nytimes.com)
Young, Uneducated and Unemployed – 24/7 Wall St.
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Economy, Education, Employment, Jobs on June 10, 2012
Young, Uneducated and Unemployed
Posted: June 6, 2012
It took a study by Rutgers academics to remind the media, and perhaps some Americans, that young people with high school educations or less cannot find work. The study was unnecessary. The Bureau of Labor Statistics releases numbers each month that prove the problem. Last month, 13% of people without high school degrees were out of work. If those marginally employed and those who have dropped out of the workforce are
included, the figure is certainly very much higher.
The Rutgers Study — “Left Out. Forgotten? Recent High School Graduates and the Great Recession” — also includes Americans who have received high school degrees. The BLS data show that these young people are not much better off that those who did not get a high school degree at all. So, once again, the study’s results are no revelation.
The major conclusion of the report:
Overall, only 3 in 10 high school graduates are employed full time, compared to college graduates who are employed at nearly twice that rate. For those who graduated high school in 2006, 2007, and 2008 — before the recession — 37% are employed full time, compared to only 16% who graduated during the recession era.
These figures are worse than the BLS ones, but the government numbers, again, do not include those outside the full-time workforce. Another conclusion of the report is that people with low education attainment get low-paying jobs, when they get them. A look at government job numbers would have revealed that easily.
The only “original” conclusion of the report is that 79% of young people without strong education backgrounds see their first jobs as “getting by.” Only 17% see their work as a step to a career. Those “careers” will not pay much more than low wages for years. Again, not much of a revelation.
The summary of the findings of the report is not helpful, at least in terms providing a solution for the problem:
There is tremendous pessimism among high school graduates about what the future holds for them. The number expecting their generation to do less well financially than the one before them outnumbers those who expect to do better by a margin of four to one. Most believe they are less prepared than the previous generation to enter the workforce.
There is nothing original or helpful about that, as the problem gets worse and not better.
Douglas A. McIntyre
Young, Uneducated and Unemployed – 24/7 Wall St..
Related articles
- Jobs Picture Grim for Recent High School Grads – Stephanie Czekalinski – NationalJournal.com (mbcalyn.com)
- Number of the Week: Most Unemployed Have College Experience (blogs.wsj.com)
- More Young Americans Out of High School Are Also Out of Work (nytimes.com)
- High Schools Grads ‘Scarred’ By High Unemployment (npr.org)
- Young, Uneducated and Unemployed (247wallst.com)
- These Sad Charts Show How Desperate Young People Are For Jobs (businessinsider.com)
- Half of unemployed Filipinos not looking for work, survey shows (business.inquirer.net)
- New Normal: Majority Of Unemployed Attended College (news.investors.com)
- High Schools Grads ‘Scarred’ By High Unemployment (wnyc.org)
- Educated but Unemployed (sott.net)
The bigger recovery woe – Great Recession – Salon.com
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Economy on April 6, 2012
FRIDAY, APR 6, 2012
The bigger recovery woe
The 1% is doing great. But the economy won’t stabilize until regular consumers have money to start spending again
In this Feb. 28, 2012, Laurie Hanson looks over clothing at the Adorn clothing store in Montpelier, Vt. (Credit: AP Photo/Toby Talbot)
The economy added only 120,000 jobs in March – down from the rate of more than 200,000 in each of the preceding three months. The rate of unemployment dropped from 8.3 to 8.2 percent mainly because fewer people were searching for jobs – and that rate depends on how many people are actively looking.
It’s way too early to conclude the jobs recovery is stalling, but there’s reason for concern.
Remember: Consumer spending is 70 percent of the economy. Employers won’t hire without enough sales to justify the additional hires. It’s up to consumers to make it worth their while.
But real spending (adjusted to remove price changes) this year hasn’t been going anywhere. It increased just .5 percent in February after an anemic .2 percent increase in January.
The reason consumers aren’t spending more is they don’t have the money. Personal income was up just .2 percent in February – barely enough to keep up with inflation. As a result, personal saving as a percent of disposable income tumbled to 3.7 percent in February from 4.3 percent in January.
Personal saving is now at its lowest level since March 2009.
American consumers, in short, are hitting a wall. They don’t dare save much less because their jobs are still insecure. They can’t borrow much more. Their home values are still dropping, and many are underwater – owing more on their homes than the homes are worth.
The economy has been growing but almost all the gains have gone to the very top. As I’ve noted, this is the most lopsided recovery on record.
You will hear other theories about the hiring slowdown, but they don’t wash.
It’s not due to “uncertainty” about the economy. That’s a tautology – the economy’s future is always uncertain, especially when consumers don’t have the dough to keep it going.
It’s not because of fears about a European recession. Europe has been in the skids for some time now. Besides, the American economy doesn’t really depend on exports to Europe.
And it’s not about gas prices or the rise in healthcare insurance premiums. Both are up, but they’ve been trending up for many months.
It’s because consumers’ pockets are almost empty.
We’ll avoid a double-dip, but the most likely scenario in coming months is a continuation of the same – an anemic jobs recovery.
President Obama will claim the economy is improving – and, technically, it is. Growth this year will most likely average around 2 percent. The problem is, most Americans aren’t feeling it in their paychecks.
Mitt Romney will claim the economy is in terrible shape – and there will be enough evidence to justify his “cup-half-empty” rhetoric.
But when it comes to explaining what’s really wrong with the economy, Romney is the perfect foil for Obama because Romney represents the richest of the rich – a man who raked in more than $20 million last year, and paid a tax rate of just 13.9 percent (lower than much of the middle class).
He made that money by buying up “under-performing” companies – that is, companies that employed more people than they needed to, and carried less debt than was necessary to show big profits (interest on debt is deductible from company income). Romney’s firm, Bain Capital, made him and his colleagues fortunes by firing workers and loading companies up with debt.
And there’s America’s economic problem in a nutshell.
Romney and his ilk are doing wonderfully well, but the rest of the nation is still in deep trouble. Yet the U.S. economy can’t fully recover on the spending of millionaires.
The president has already announced that this election is about America’s surge toward ever-greater inequality. He’s right. And this painful recovery shows it.
It would be sadly ironic if Obama lost the election because the economy responded to widening inequality exactly as expected.
The bigger recovery woe – Great Recession – Salon.com.
Related articles
- Be Safe With Your Pedi, or You Could Regret It (bellasugar.com)
- Great News For The Salon Industry (usemeproducts.wordpress.com)
- Is This Salon Mishap True or False? (bellasugar.com)
- Are African-American Salons in Danger? (bellasugar.com)
- Would You Rather Go to a Tip-Free Salon? (bellasugar.com)
- Salons see uptick in business as economy improves (usatoday.com)
- Detroit’s Consent Agreement Offers a New Start – NYTimes.com (policyabcs.wordpress.com)
- Pretty Pet Salon Asian Edition – Oriented Games (itunes.apple.com)
- I’m just as afraid of hood rats as you are! (thatgirlnamednaima.wordpress.com)
- 51 Months After The Start Of The Recession, Here Is The Report Card (zerohedge.com)
Cagle Post » The Untold Story Behind the February Jobs Report
Posted by Michael B. Calyn in Economy, Employment, Government, Perspective, Politics on March 19, 2012
The Untold Story Behind the February Jobs Report
With its typical fanfare, the White House announced that the economy created 227,000 jobs in February. In what’s best described as a campaign speech for his boss, White House economic advisor Alan Kreuger hailed the news as evidence that the Obama administration’s jobs strategy is successful.

R.J. Matson / St. Louis Post-Dispatch (click to view more cartoons by Matson)
A close analysis of February’s jobs report exposes a less encouraging picture. The number of unemployed Americans and the unemployment rate remained unchanged from January at, respectively, 12.8 million and 8.3 percent.
As it always does, the Bureau of Labor Statistics relied on the payroll survey to reach its findings. Despite months of so called “robust job gains,” about 5.4 million have been jobless for more than 27 weeks and 1.2 million have given up looking for work. Unemployment benefits have expired for some; others will end in 2012.
Unemployment’s long term effects are devastating. The longer prospective workers remain unemployed, the faster their skills erode and the harder it is for them to find a decent job. More than 40 percent of the total unemployed are categorized as “long term.” One contributing factor may be the extended unemployment benefits which some economists claim reduces the incentive to actively pursue work.
Another grim variable the White House ignores is that current job creation doesn’t keep up with population growth. The further back you go, the less comforting the jobs to population growth ratio becomes. The nation needs 5.6 million jobs to return to 2008 levels.
According to statistics crunched by the Economic Policy Institute for CNN Money, California would have to create 1.8 million jobs to keep up with its growing population. That represents nearly 12 percent more jobs than exist today. Despite its deep economic woes and huge budget deficit California’s working age population, fueled in large part by immigration, has increased by one million since the 2007 recession started. California’s unemployment rate is 10.9 percent, the nation’s second highest.
Another problem the administration gives short shrift to is the type of jobs created. According to statistician John Williams, 92 percent of the new February jobs are in low wage service positions. As examples, waiting on tables and tending bar accounted for 20 percent of the overall jobs increase while 29 percent of the spike came in health care and social services. Driving a truck is one of the highest paying new service jobs.
By extension, only about eight percent of new jobs could be considered professional, like engineering or computer-related employment. As good jobs disappear, the United States’ income disparity grows greater and the nation becomes more deeply entrenched as a two-tier society—a handful of super-rich and millions of poor.
One crucial variable the administration refuses to acknowledge much less change is immigration which fuels about 75 percent of the population growth. Legal immigrants—about 1 million a year—receive work permits. More legally authorized people increases the work force and reduce job opportunities for native-born Americans.
The relationship between more immigration and fewer jobs is undeniable. Yet Capitol Hill is unwilling to help unemployed Americans by reducing immigration. As a result, the White House has to cook the employment books every month to create as favorable a picture of the economy as possible.
Cagle Post » The Untold Story Behind the February Jobs Report.
Related articles
- Obama’s dilemma: More jobs, same unemployment rate (money.cnn.com)
- February jobs: Another robust report (cbsnews.com)
- California unemployment rate falls slightly in February (abclocal.go.com)
- Jobs report: 227,000 jobs created in February, unemployment rate unchanged at 8.3% (dailykos.com)
- Black Unemployment Ticks Up Slightly (huffingtonpost.com)
- Employment Steadily Improved in February, as Economy Added 227,000 Jobs (yubanet.com)
- Jobs report shows continued growth, but increase in black unemployment (thegrio.com)
- Unemployment fell in all but five states in January, but other data show some labor market weakness (dailykos.com)
- Young, gifted and unemployed in 2012 (emileczka.wordpress.com)
- Obama boosted by another strong jobs report (thegrio.com)






Recent Comments