The college admissions equivalent is that the right stuff is earning a good academic record, and the right people is having legacy or development status.
But, just like not all colleges are super competitive or consider legacy or development status, not all types of jobs are super competitive or rely heavily on nepotistic hiring. (Of course, the competitiveness of jobs varies significantly on economic and industry upturns and downturns.)
Most aren’t - or there wouldn’t be 4.5% unemployment.
A few thoughts.
When kids tell me that career services is useless, that often means that the kid assumed that walking through the door would get them halfway to getting a job. That’s not the drill. Career services will provide useful tools for the kid to use. But tools only work when they are used. That drain won’t unclog itself, even with the snake sitting on the counter, right??
When kids tell me they can’t network because they don’t know anyone in their desired field, that often means they sent an email to a random name they found on LinkedIn, got no response, then gave up. Professors testify for Congressional sub-committees and consult for industry. Grad students attend conferences. Alumni work at startups, write for publications which cover the desired industry, have colleagues at competitors, etc.
This is networking. But you gotta be organized. Don’t drop in on your professor, plop down on the visitor chair and say “I need a job can you help?” Prepare a resume before the meeting. Make a target list of places you are interested in learning more about. Tie your interest to something personal. “I loved hearing you at the symposium last week describing the limitations of recycling technologies. I’m really interested in climate friendly industries and would be grateful if you could connect me to anyone who is working in the field of urban design, transportation alternatives, or solid waste infrastructure. I volunteered with the university’s sustainability task force for the last two years and learned so much that can be applied to small cities.”
Same basic speech to the grad students, alums, etc. Keep a spreadsheet so you don’t bug the same person twice in one week.
More targeted than random applications into the LinkedIn void.
Career services can help generate a list of alums working in the field. Career services can give a student the list of companies coming to the career fair. Career services can get a student the discount code for admission to industry conferences,symposia, etc
But they can’t hand a kid a job….
You have to go to relevant symposiums, conferences, activities on campus to build your network. This is low hanging fruit that often gets overlooked.
They aren’t always very well attended which also means it’s a great chance to network and that can start at the Q&A. Listen to the talk, figure out if you can ask a good question re: the subject - and ask during the Q&A. Follow up with the person after the presentation is over.
While most of these suggestions are wonderful, I think few kids do this. They’re at school - they’re studying, hanging out with friends, working, partying etc.
I think it’s just not realistic for 98% of kids. It’s the masses that struggle.
When we talk about the kid who meets with the head of supply chain and dining services, it’s just not the real world.
Yes, it’s on the kids but I don’t think the suggestions move the needle for - pretty much anyone. Those things - just don’t happen. For most kids, even networking doesn’t happen.
So what do those kids do - the ones at Norhhern Illinois or Frostburg State or Marshall.
They’re all great thoughts but most kids aren’t in this realm. So what is the solution for those kids ?
Many graduate without even having tried to find a job. They wait til they get home - scary but true.
What my son found so frustrating when he was laid off and looking for a job was the number of jobs that were not really out there but the advertising continues. They post if for a period of time and either they have already hired for that position or they have eliminated that job and it no longer exists. They do not update their postings and I find that so very wrong. I don’t recall the % but it was a large number he felt were not real available positions at the date he applied.
Sad but true. I have that internally too. A job posted I kind of was thinking about applying to as my old boss suggested. But we are re-orging and I’m told the person is already identified but they have to post.
But this is the issue -you don’t know what is and isn’t legit - hence the need to apply to them and then some.
We just had a job posted for a high level (not executive) manager. All 8 interviewees came from the LinkedIn ad. So there are legit listings. I’m not sure how many applied. I just know how many we interviewed.
@threeofthree
Yes, often postings are on job sites b/c they are required to post it but they already have an internal candidate targeted for the position. Stinks.
DH is on LinkedIn and gets multiple job opportunity messages/solicitations every week. It might even be every day. From his experience, for higher level positions, it’s common that HR/recruiters are reaching out to potential candidates through, at least in his case, networks for his skill base in the metro area. He isn’t looking for a job, but opportunities are coming to him. While he isn’t looking, he pays attention to these constant solicitations, to follow what companies are doing in his specialty area, and is able to help other friends who may be job hunting.
It would be great if the actual survey numbers were posted instead of a ChatGPT summary of a WSJ summary of a survey. However, from what was written in the summary of a summary, I don’t see anything to suggest an elite or bust type distribution, rather than a normal distribution. The article says they are defining top 5% as >$300k household income. It’s not surprising to me that the small minority of millennials in the extreme right tail of a normal distribution would be far more concentrated in some employment fields than others. I also don’t find it surprising that tech, finance, medicine, and law would be among those employment fields that would be more represented in this group than average.
What I do find surprising is that the summary does not distinguish between single income households and dual income households. I’d expect it’s far more common to reach $300k household income as 2 x ~$150k income than 1 x $300k income. The number of careers paths for which ~$150k income is relatively common is far longer than the ones listed in the article. As such, I expect one of the most influential factors, if not the most influential, in reaching $300k household earnings is marrying a similar or higher earning spouse. This would not be a pro for males in tech, given the gender disparity in tech – both in college and while working.
And another problem with the analysis is the noise created by those with variable incomes.
I am a college professor, and despite obnoxious (usually right-wing) anti-tenure talking points to the contrary, professors don’t get paid well—I make less than $100k/year, even including contract work. It is, however, stable income. My spouse, on the other hand, co-owns and -runs an S corporation, and so in high-profit years we easily clear $300k, while in low-profit years we’re much closer to $150k.
That’s not the only model for that, either—those with commission-based income face similar spikes and valleys. And so really, the idea that there are high-earnings jobs and low-earnings jobs and you can place any given job into one of those two categories is a gross simplification.
Another benefit of the dual income family is hedging against the financial impact of layoffs. High earning dual income familes (especially those with careers in different industries) help minimize financial risk. Also reduces stress that one person has the support the entire family.
It’s not just salary but also double the 401k match, being able to compare medical plans, more total social security benefits at retirement etc.
Plus the “marriage penalty” only kicks in at the highest federal income tax bracket.
Of course, if the family with two high incomes lives within the means of one of their incomes (the smaller one), then they are much better hedged than if their budget consumes all of both of their incomes.
generally spending has a tendency to raise and meet the disposable income level but even then dual 401k contribution plus matches and forced savings can compound magically.
There are also non financial benefits of dual income families. For example, helping your kids understand different industries, careers, using your network to introduce them to people and overall guidance on career paths and avoiding professional mistakes.
Ok ….but job prospects ???
In our situation, for most of our careers, one of us was employed with a company that offered the healthcare benefits, etc, and the other was self employed. While the total income could vary by year, the benefit was that we had the benefit of healthcare and such from one, with the benefit of some self employment tax write offs/expenses from the other.
Do I detect an admission that “it matters where you go”, or an admission that “prestige counts”, or a shift to the view (roundly disdained on CC) that there are some actual benefits to being at College A (highly regarded, well resourced, engaged faculty, “elite” type status) vs. College B?
I’m shocked that TSBNA of all people would admit this.
Nonetheless- it’s a little insulting to claim that a kid at Frostburg State doesn’t know how to use Google to discover when and where industry conferences in the desired sector take place, and doesn’t know how to ask Career Services for the code for a student discount to either attend, or enter the Zoom Room where the keynote address is being delivered. And it’s monstrously insulting to presume that a kid at Northern Illinois doesn’t know how to go to office hours to discuss long term goals with a professor.
But the turnaround is fascinating. Yes, there are kids who graduate from Stanford without a job. And there are kids who graduate from Stanford without a clue as to the next step. But the manicured paths on campus, the coffee shops, the libraries, the labs, the university affiliated think tanks and archives are filled to the brim with “people who make things happen” whether it’s at startups, established medical device companies, renowned economic publishing powerhouses, other academic institutions, and corporate talent in any sector you could imagine. You can’t walk across campus without running into a team from a VC firm looking for their next investment in something weird and promising; you can’t add oat milk to your coffee without bumping into the scholar whose work on labor force participation or the impact of a rise in the minimum wage has influenced the policies of 12 different countries, not to mention 20 states in the USA.
Let’s return back to topic please
