Workforce Developments

Happy holidays from Workforce Developments

'Twas the Friday before Christmas
And all through the blog
Not a creature was typing,
Not even a dog....

I'll be taking the next two weeks off from blogging here at Workforce Developments. I know, the timing is terrible, what with the Writers' Guild strike and all those reruns on t.v. If you're looking for entertainment over the next few weeks, take a trip down the sidebar, do a little shopping, read a good book, or just enjoy the time you have with family and friends. 

In the new year, I wish you all full enrollment in your programs, outcomes surpassing your wildest dreams, and an ever-growing share of unrestricted funds.

See you in 2008!

Toys for the World

Here's a little workforce-related holiday carol sure to brighten your day.  It begins

Toys for the world
Are made by kids
And not by elves at all...

If you don't see the embedded media player above, click here to download the mp3 file.

Who are the carolers? Street theater/activist group, the Billionaires for Greater Global Inequality.

Connecting industry and occupation data: the feds reply

Be careful what you say on a blog. The feds might answer.

In this case, it's a good thing.

Last week, in the first of my two posts on labor market data and career ladders (click here for part 2), I asked, in an aside, when the feds planned to create a crosswalk between the NAICS and SOC code systems. Not even a single day passed before I got an answer via email from my loyal correspondent at DOL, courtesy of one of his colleagues.

They haven't done a crosswalk, but they do have some other tools you'll want to check out when you're trying to connect industry and occupational data. I'll tell you about one right now: BLS's National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. On that page you can pick your target industry or industries, down to the 4-digit NAICS code level. There you'll find a list of two-digit SOC code occupations. Click on those, and it will take you to tables showing employment and wages at the six-digit level. If you already have access to state level data by occupation, you could just jump over to that dataset from here.

Or you can work your way through BLS. Click on the six-digit occupation of your choice, and that will take you to a series of tables showing which industries that most commonly hire people in that occupation, as well as some sample state and metro area data. You can see what it looks like in this example: Retail Salespersons (SOC 41-2031). Click on the "Create Customized Tables" data, and then you can really go to town. Multiple states or cities, multiple occupations. To make the most of this, though, you'll want to have your full list of occupations selected in advance. It's a long, long drop-down list to select through.

This process links industries to occupations and back again, and it will get you to state and city level data. This is what I've been looking for but hadn't found yet. This process might be a little tedious if you're working in a sector that crosses multiple industries, but with good data collection, tedious is often what it takes.

If this sounds confusing, just click over to the first page and try it out for yourself. It will become clearer as you walk through it step by step.

I hope it goes without saying that as good as this data is, mining it effectively is only the first step toward building a career ladder. Once you've pulled all this together, you still have to talk to employers, workers, training providers and other stakeholders to find out what happens in the real world.

My thanks to the folks at DOL for sharing this info.

Labor market data meets reality

Labor market data can be your friend, but you must take care not to abuse it. I began this post yesterday. Today, the conclusion.

As I promised, I'm not naming names, but I read a study recently that used nothing more than basic NAICS and SOC code data combined with some info from O*NET to draw conclusions like this:

Occupation Y requires more training and pays better than Occupation X. Therefore we can place them on a career ladder with Occupation Y as a move up from Occupation X. Occupation Z has even higher training requirements and pays more than Occupation Y, so it can be the next step up on the career ladder, like this:

Who says that just because one occupation pays better, requires more training and is within the same industry as another, that career pathways between the two exist? That might sound logical, but the authors provided no evidence that these pathways exist in the real world.

I've heard from at least one nurse training program that had to learn this the hard way. They originally thought that since being a registered nurse (RN) paid better and required more training than being a certified nurse assistant (CNA) or licensed vocational (or practical) nurse (LVN or LPN), all they needed to meet the huge demand for RNs in their area was train CNAs and LVNs to become RNs. They got the money and created the program, but they weren't having the success they'd imagined.

So they started talking to hospitals, nursing schools and nurses. That's when they discovered that the move from CNA or LVN to RN just never happened in the real world.

Real world experience and knowledge - it's the magic ingredient that's missing from analysis based entirely on LMI data. Without it, you can make major mistakes. In the case of the nursing program, they used this new information to redesign their program, and now it is a real world career pathway.

As a workforce board or nonprofit, you're outside the industry. That puts you at both an advantage and disadvantage when looking at labor market data. You can see opportunities for advancement that employers might not be able to see from their vantage point. But without talking to both employers and workers, you'll never know if those opportunities are real or theoretical.

Having good labor market data in hand will help when you go talk to employers. You can show them what you see in the data and ask if those career pathways exist at their company or across companies. If those pathways don't exist you can ask questions about who gets those better jobs and what prevents people in those lower-paid positions from moving up. Be sure to talk to current workers in those jobs too. Find out from them what are the barriers to advancement.

My point is this: labor market data is good for beginning to look at an industry. I'd say it's a necessary first step. But to get to know a sector or industry well enough to develop effective workforce development programs, you're going to have to do a lot more legwork.

Photo credit: leptonic.com

(Mis)use of labor market data

I love labor market data. Despite its limitations, aggregations and aggravations, it offers a terrific first look at an industry or occupation. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and Standard Occupation Codes (SOC) systems each have a sublime internal logic and consistency that is (generally) clear and straightforward.

Problem is that this labor market data is more limited than some workforce development professionals realize. As a result, it sometimes gets used for purposes beyond its capacity. Which gets us to my point today: Woe betide the researcher or practitioner who misuses LMI data. There are some tempting shortcuts out there that might bring you to the wrong conclusions. It's like using a shovel to prune your roses - you can cut the stems if you hack at them long enough, but the results will be ugly, and you could kill the plant in the process.

I recently did an LMI data analysis project for a client. We were looking at a sector with notoriously low wage jobs and very limited opportunities for upward mobility. My client wants to work with employers to develop career pathways in that sector, and needs good data to start from.

I compiled data on the relevant industries by NAICS code, then searched O*NET by industry keywords to identify occupations. O*NET didn't give me a complete picture, so I drilled down into the SOC codes from relevant major categories to look for other occupations. To do that, I needed to talk with my client about their experience placing workers in jobs in this sector. Without that on-the-ground knowledge, my list would have been incomplete.

Note to the feds: When are you going to create a crosswalk between the NAICS and SOC systems? Surely you have enough real world data from the states to calculate which SOC code occupations commonly appear in each NAICS code industry.

O*NET provides descriptive data for each occupation as well as wage information. It tells you if the occupation is in demand nationally, and categorizes it by the level of training required (Job Zones 1 through 5). From there you can link to state-level wage data on the America's Career One-Stop page. Of course, if you want data for the county or city level, you're going to have to go to your state's labor market info source. Moreover, if you want data on a large number of occupations, this method of going occupation-by-occupation in O*NET is painfully tedious and time-consuming. In this case, I hope your state agency has downloadable tables with the same info.

I used all this data to create a series of tables presenting and sorting data on this sector. At this point my client had the information they needed to begin building a career pathways ladder. The operative word here is begin. Everything I've told you about so far is not enough information to build such a ladder, but I've seen good people who ought to know better create career pathways from not much more than this.

In fact, tomorrow, I'll give you an example. I won't name names, but I'll show you what they did, and explain why they shouldn't have.

Spotlighting poverty in the presidential campaign

Here's a new website you'll want to check out and keep updated on: Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity.

Created by the Annie E. Casey and Eos Foundations, Spotlight on Poverty is working to "build momentum for national action addressing poverty in 2009." They've begun by asking the 2008 presidential candidates to answer five questions related to poverty and economic opportunity. They include "Would your Administration set a specific numerical target and timeline for reducing poverty?"

Imagine that!

The candidates have been invited to submit written or videotaped answers, and all responses will be posted on their site. I'm delighted to see foundations pushing for greater debate on poverty in America, and I'll be watching closely to see what the candidates have to say.

Housing the middle class

Lately I've been running across the phrase "workforce housing" more and more often. It's a term I'm not so familiar with, but it's not difficult to guess what it means. As housing prices skyrocketed in recent years during the don't-call-it-a-bubble, more and more middle income people have found themselves priced out of the market. Hard working professionals, like firefighters, nurses, librarians, professors, even government bureaucrats and nonprofit workers, suddenly find the only homes they can afford are located far from their workplaces, or just don't exist at all.

I wouldn't blame folks earn wages closer to the minimum wage if they just shrugged and said, join the club. They've known for a long time what it's like to work hard and play by the rules but still not be able to get by financially.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about Albuquerque, New Mexico's Workforce Housing Public Education Project. They created a great slideshow making the case for public funding of workforce housing there. Now I've run across an article by Seattle developer Hal Ferris calling the workforce housing shortage a silent epidemic. He explains how it's bad for workers, the environment and communities.

Ferris concludes by emphasizing what can be done about it and the roles everyone has to play in making affordable workforce housing a reality: 

If we want a future in which middle-income families are an integral part of the cities in which they serve, we all can help by encouraging our city councils and county representatives to adopt the tools as well as create new mechanisms to increase the production of workforce housing. As developers, we can make smart choices and commit to integrate affordable housing into projects. And as business leaders and major employers of the critical workforce, we can support policies and practices that promote choice and opportunity for middle-income citizens who are core to the livability and vibrancy of our cities.

Image credit: US Environmental Protection Agency

Health care wages to rise 27% in the next ten years

It's time to update your labor market data, and it might be time to reassess your job search strategies. It also might be time to reconsider when you plan to retire.

The Bureau of Labor Stats has issued new employment projections for the 2006-2016 time period. BLS estimates total employment will grow by 15.6 million jobs, or 10 percent. That's slightly less than the 15.9 million jobs created in the 1996-2006 decade.

No real surprises in the data, but in some cases it's stunning to see the hard numbers. For example, the number of 55 and older workers is expected to rise by 46.7%, more than five times the growth in the labor force overall. By 2016 they'll make up nearly a quarter of the nation's labor force, almost double their share in 1996. Getting onto AARP's "best employers" list is going to become much more important for businesses looking to hire.

Opportunities in service occupations in industries like health care, retail and food services will rise, although how many will be new jobs and how many will be replacements for people leaving those jobs varies significantly. See the attached chart.

BLS expects wages in Health care and social assistance, Business and professional services and in Educational services to each rise more than 20% over the next decade. In Manufacturing, wages will decline by 11%.

For the press release and all the info from BLS, click here.

Best employers for workers over 50: 2007 update

AARP has announced this year's winners in its seventh annual Best Employers for Workers over 50. Topping the list are

1. SC Johnson of Racine, WI, with 35% of its 3,297 workers over 50
2. Mercy Health Center of Janesville, WI, with 28% of its 3,721 workers over 50
3. First Horizon National Corporation of Memphis, TN, with 23% of its 12,208 workers over 50
4. Scripps Health of San Diego, CA, with 31% of its 11,119 workers over 50
5. Stanley Consultants of Muscatine, IA, with 30% of its 1,018 workers over 50 (and woman recently named President and COO)
6. Lee Memorial Health System of Fort Myers, FL, with 37% of its 8,595 workers over 50
7. Leesburg Regional Medical Center of Leesburg, FL, with 38% of its 2,658 workers over 50
8. George Mason University of Fairfax, VA, with 48% of its 5,760 workers over 50
9. Principal Financial Group of Des Moines, IA, with 19% of its 13,100 workers over 50
10. Massachusetts General Hospital of Boston, MA, with 27% of its 19,480 workers over 50

What jumps out at you from this list? How about six of the top ten are in health services, a high demand industry where many employers are experiencing a shortage of skilled workers. If I counted right, about 20 of the top 50 (40%) are health-related employers. Two of the top ten are in financial services, another industry with high labor demand.

If you look at past years' top 50 lists you'll see a lot of the same employers repeated year after year. Is that because the best remain the best, or because not enough employers know about this list? All US companies with at least 50 employees are eligible to apply. Here's how the top 50 were selected. 

For the full list of this year's honorees, click here. You can also see the lists from 2006, 2005 and 2004.

Workforce development swag!

If you've been looking for just the right gift for that workforce professional in your life, your search is over. Well, maybe.

For years I've struggled to explain to people what I do for a living. I can keep it simple by saying, I help people get good jobs. But really, it's more than that. In workforce development we also help businesses find skilled workers, and we help strengthen the local economy by ensuring both businesses and workers thrive. 

So I sat down recently and tried to design a visual image that would explain it all. I came up with this Venn diagram that puts the workforce development at the center, right where we belong:

(Click on the image to see a bigger version.)

Not too bad, I thought. So I headed over to CafePress.com and put it on a t-shirt. Then a mug and a few other items as well. I've set up a shop at CafePress.com/workforcedev, where you can buy stuff emblazoned with this workforce development image. I'll donate 5% of the price of every item purchased to the Garment Worker Center here in Los Angeles. Click here for more details about pricing and products, or just click over to the shop.

I'll admit, I'm better with words than visuals, so this diagram is pretty simple. If you have an idea for a image that helps to explain what workforce development is, I'd love to share it here on the blog.

When did workforce become Congress's lowest priority?

If you're not receiving The Workforce Alliance's Washington updates by email, click over to this page right now. TWA does a great job of tracking what's going on in workforce policy, and advocating for our field. At the recent NNSP conference TWA's federal policy director Rachel Gragg explained what's going on in DC and what we as practitioners can do to support positive policy change.

TWA's most recent July-November update includes good - but distressing - analysis of how the recent appropriations bill to fund the federal Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education (HR 3043) developed and why Bush vetoed it. TWA summarizes the overall problem this way: 

...the workforce development field should understand that when faced with competing demands, this Congress repeatedly prioritized workforce development programs last—first by failing to increase funding for these programs despite years of deep cuts and then again by failing to reject efforts to further increase funding for politically popular programs at the expense of workforce programs. Not one Member of Congress objected to these cuts, and no one was willing to speak on the floor in favor of workforce development programs. (emphasis added)

How has it come to this? Across the US, companies are begging for skilled workers, and experts concur the problem will only get worse as the population ages. Veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan need help reintegrating into the workforce. Workforce development agencies are reaching out and developing regional partnerships across political boundaries and sector initiatives that target key industries. So Congress and the president reward this kind of hard work and innovation that can strengthen the economy, by cutting workforce development funding?

What's it going to take to turn this ship around? Do we have to wait until after the 2008 election before anyone in DC will pay attention to our nation's workforce?