Can job training work without job creation?

Yesterday's New York Times had an article that, on the face of it, might have looked like bad coverage for the workforce development field. The title captured the tone: Job retraining may fall short of high hopes. 

The reporter talked to several laid off workers who've had less than stellar success after job retraining programs. Some have retrained only to find no jobs in their new field. Some have retrained for new careers, only to be laid off from that one. Some find themselves working for significantly less earnings than in their previous jobs, or less than what they thought their new career would pay.

The article cites a recent study from DOL's Employment and Training Administration that looked at 160,000 participants who entered WIA programs in 12 states between mid-2003 to 2005. The study concludes, among other things, that "The marginal benefits of training may exceed $400 in earnings each quarter." 

For any of us working in the field, this isn't news at all. Older workers who've been laid off often find themselves slipping down closer to the bottom of any new career ladder they train for. What's more, good jobs with family wages and benefits have been disappearing from the American landscape in recent years. How many defined-benefit pension plans are still left out there?

Job training can't work without job creation. And it can't just be any jobs, but jobs that replace earnings in a meaningful way. This study and the light being shone on it by the NYT is an opportunity for us to ask some important questions:

• We're doing what we can to train people for new careers, but are the jobs out there?
• Whose responsibility is to to create those jobs?
• Do those jobs pay enough in earnings and benefits to live on? To support a family? 
• If they don't, should we train people for those jobs?

ARRA (aka Obama's stimulus plan) is designed to begin to create new jobs and save the ones we have, but it's a short-term measure. What long-term policies and investments are needed to create good jobs that will last?

Job training image source: Housing Works

Comments

[Tricia Ryan]

I was also struck by this article. It's a sobering assessment that really does highlight the risk/reward of investing in long or short term training in this economy. Great post!

[Kim Didier]

Yes, there are jobs out there. Working in the workforce and economic development fields in Iowa, we are in need of these skilled workers. Our unemployment right now is in the 5% range, what the rest of the country had during the good times.

We currently have openings for positions in factories making wind blades, wind towers, and repairing gear boxes. For example, the gear box repair company is looking for individuals with background in automotive repair skills. We also have a need for more engineers to work in this field and to participate in R&D activities.

To the question--who is responsible for creating these jobs? I would argue that professionals in both economic development, education and workforce development need to be working much more collaboratively with the private sector to make this happen. We are all responsible and can achieve the goal if we get outside our boxes and figure out our role in the process which does not stand in isolation from others.

[Bronwyn]

Tricia and Kim, thanks for your comments. You raise two important issues that I know a lot of us are aware of, but may not have the resources to follow up on.

1) Investing in long-term training. A six week course may be enough to get someone a certificate for a job, but it isn't enough for someone who wants to move up the career ladder over the long haul. For that we need long-term training, and training that people can enter and exit over and over again as their career progresses.

2) Collaboration between all parts of the system: economic development, education, workforce development and the private sector. We're funded in silos, with different performance or outcome goals. We don't entirely understand what the other players do, and we're often skeptical of what we don't understand. We've got to get past that and build a system that works for both workers and employers.

What will it take for us to do both of those things?

[Larry Butts]

We're doing what we can to train people for new careers, but are the jobs out there?

In many cases the answer is no, we are training for jobs that will or should exist when and if the economy rebounds. What else can we do at this point? Our economy is reeling from the current recession and is producing job growth in only a few select areas.

Whose responsibility is it to create those jobs?

It is the government’s responsibility to create a healthy business atmosphere and the necessary incentives for the growth of sustainable, environmentally responsible industries or services.

Do those jobs pay enough in earnings and benefits to live on? To support a family?

Many of the jobs created in the last few years would not support a family. It is the responsibility of the government to enact laws to protect the rights, safety, and income of all working people. It is the responsibility of the business community to value, respect, and pay living wages to all their employees.

If they don't, should we train people for those jobs?

No, we should not train for jobs that do not provide a living wage for workers.

[Bronwyn]

Bob Giloth also has some excellent comments on this article on his blog: http://www.bobgiloth.com/2009/07/profound-lessons.html

I'll second this, from his post:

"I would suggest two things: 1) get the current stimulus money out on the street as fast as you can; and 2) fashion a WPA kind of works program that creates jobs fast and takes on important public work. For WPA to work, we need a national administrative framework that can act fast while knowing how to work locally. And we need a Harry Hopkins type who can get things done. How many jobs did he get off the ground in six months?"