Canada's job market for young people

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by someone123

Yeah, I think that some jobs will open up due to retirement but a lot of jobs are either disappearing or the new hires will lose a lot of the entitlements of older generations. I am not convinced that the generous pensions being paid out now will still exist in 20-30 years, for example.

I've said it many times before but the larger issues have to do with the falling value of labour due to technological changes and globalization. A lot of jobs that paid pretty well in the past (e.g. auto factory worker, bus driver) probably won't exist very far into the future, and the industries that have not been automated can still be run by cheap workers in China.

Ultimately this should be good for society because we are producing more now with less labour, and in the process we are eliminating the need for a lot of people to do a lot of undesirable jobs. The real problem is social -- most people are not seeing an increase in their standard of living, because the lion's share of the gains is being captured by one segment of society. It doesn't seem likely that this will change any time soon given the trend toward "austerity" combined with IP and inheritance laws that make it very easy to pass down self-sustaining sources of wealth.

It doesn't have anything to do with technological change or globalization; it is entirely policy dependent. If we want a middle class society with less income inequality and a tighter labour market we simply have to return to the tax levels, unionization rates, and central bankers that worry more about full employment than price stability. There is a reason why this issues are less prevalent in the nordic countries; they have the taxation levels and unionization rates that anglophone economies did between WWII and 1980.

People said precisely the same thing about the Great Depression. That technological change had created a structural problem in the economy and the issue was a mismatch between the labour force's existing skill set and that which was then needed. They further claimed that the Depression was necessary to change the structure of the economy and provide an incentive for labour to adjust to the new reality. Well ten years of suffering didn't solve anything. The problem disappeared when nearly every government on the planet found that they had to hire every able bodied young man they could get their hands on, often without giving the guy a choice, and pay businesses to hire just about everyone else.

[miketoronto]

You can go to University and still get the university education and hands on experience.
I went to Ryerson and they did a great job of teaching us hands on stuff through studios and also the theory and critical thinking, etc.
We were actually doing projects just as if we were working in a planning firm.

I also think young people really do need to stand up and start demanding more. It is not right that the people before us get all the benefits and good pay, and now they want us to work for cheap and get no benefits, etc.
The truth is our government and our companies can afford not only pension plans, but also to pay us well, and to offer benefits. But if we keep accepting the dismantling of our quality of life so that CEO's can make $20 million instead of $10 million a year, then we are going to be screwed.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

The truth is our government and our companies can afford not only pension plans, but also to pay us well, and to offer benefits. But if we keep accepting the dismantling of our quality of life so that CEO's can make $20 million instead of $10 million a year, then we are going to be screwed.

Sadly that $10 million you take back from the CEO amounts to a whopping $1000 per employee in your 10,000-employee strong company. While I don't disagree with you in terms of what's proper for a CEO to make - it ain't gonna do squat to pay those pensions. That tiny top-up in your RRSP every year is chickenfeed compared to what it costs to fund a DB pension plan.

The simple truth is that we CAN'T afford boomer-level pensions for everyone. Quite frankly, we can't afford it for them and I expect many large corporations to go bankrupt mostly due to DB pensions being paid out over 30. Retiring at 55 or even 60 is a ridiculous concept when life expectancy is over 80. People at those ages have plenty to contribute economically and having the rest of us pay them to sit on their ass for decades is financially impossible.

[Copes]

Originally Posted by freeweed

The simple truth is that we CAN'T afford boomer-level pensions for everyone. Quite frankly, we can't afford it for them and I expect many large corporations to go bankrupt mostly due to DB pensions being paid out over 30. Retiring at 55 or even 60 is a ridiculous concept when life expectancy is over 80. People at those ages have plenty to contribute economically and having the rest of us pay them to sit on their ass for decades is financially impossible.

Cheers to that my friend. We really haven't adjusted to the massive increase in life expectancy, but we need to. And fast. Its a damn shame. I don't see why I, as a 23 year old, am going to be forced to pay for an otherwise productive person to sit around for 30+ years, while my generation is burdened with insane debt. I won't have it, quite frankly. Expect this to be a major political issue in the future. It doesn't receive enough attention now because of how apathetic my generation tends to be when it comes to most things. I expect this to be different in ten to twenty years.

In regards to the University argument, I just want to share yet another story. My best friend did a five year co-op program with a focus in Accounting. Due to spending a semester studying abroad (an exchange with a University in Malaysia, where he undoubtedly gained a vast amount of knowledge he wouldn't have otherwise had), he had an extra business course that he had never had any intention of taking. During his last semester (this past winter) he was in the final stages of his program, and had to take the prep-course for whichever accounting designation he intended to pursue (either CMA or CA in his case). He wanted to take both, as he wasn't sure exactly where he would end up post grad. This is a guy who has spent five years studying to be an accountant. He knew from the get go what he wanted. He wanted to learn more about the field by taking both prep courses. However, he was missing one of his electives. He asked if he could wave the elective, or use the additional accounting course as his elective. The business faculty flat out refused, insisting that he meet his elective requirements. He was forced to choose between the two accounting courses (a decision he was not in a position to make due to still not having a job), and instead of taking a second 6000-level accounting course and learning more about the field he was genuinely interested in, he took an introductory religious studies course.

It's nice to say "Universities are there to make students well rounded", but the bottom line is they are offering a service to students. When this service directly interferes with their career preparation in the name of "exposing students to something else" there is a problem. I was shocked when he was telling me how he had to take an introductory religious studies course instead of become a more competent accountant.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by freeweed

The simple truth is that we CAN'T afford boomer-level pensions for everyone. Quite frankly, we can't afford it for them and I expect many large corporations to go bankrupt mostly due to DB pensions being paid out over 30. Retiring at 55 or even 60 is a ridiculous concept when life expectancy is over 80. People at those ages have plenty to contribute economically and having the rest of us pay them to sit on their ass for decades is financially impossible.

Amen to that. Applies equally (if not more) to public sector.

Although I will get a UWO pension, I (and the rest of the UWO gang) am on a defined contribution plan.

Which means that I will have less than anybody had forecasted, if the last 7 years of returns are any guide.

[miketoronto]

Well just adjust how the pension operates. But I do not believe for one moment that we can't provide benefits and other benefits to workers.

For one, stop workers from retiring and collecting pensions and then going right back to work sometimes for the same company, and collecting a hefty salary while also collecting a pension. This is happening a lot. And not only does it stress the pension system, but it also reduces the amount of jobs for young people.

On the thing of pensions. We pay it into it anyway. Its not like the company is on the hook for funding our pensions 100% anyway.

[MolsonExport]

^you mean, like "presto"?

[manny_santos]

I am back in Canada and I have been continuing to apply for jobs. One question:

If I'm applying for jobs in cities or provinces other than my own, how much do my chances of getting an interview depend on where I live? Would my chances of getting a job in Nova Scotia, for example, go up if I moved to Nova Scotia now? I ask because I've seen some job postings in Saskatchewan that are open only to people who already live in Saskatchewan.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

If I'm applying for jobs in cities or provinces other than my own, how much do my chances of getting an interview depend on where I live? Would my chances of getting a job in Nova Scotia, for example, go up if I moved to Nova Scotia now? I ask because I've seen some job postings in Saskatchewan that are open only to people who already live in Saskatchewan.

In my (limited) experience... some companies are OK with this, some are not. Remote interviews really vary depending on the company. And a lot of companies don't want to get into the discussion of whether or not they pay your moving expenses.

I'd say if you have plans to end up somewhere, move there first. Although if you CAN get a company to pay for it, it's pretty freaking sweet.

[big T]

I would say it depends on whether you know someone or are being referred by someone at the company you're applying for. This was my case and not only was I granted an interview, I actually got them to pay for the move. Conversely, if they don't know you they would likely be reluctant to take chances on someone from out of town, so you're probably upping your chances quite a bit by moving there first.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Perhaps then it's time for Canadian universities to shift their raison d'être - some of our global competitors see university as job training (as I said in an earlier post, in Spanish they say "studying a career" when you go to university in Mexico) and students are graduating with actual skills for work. Smart students are also heavily encouraged to go into science-related fields, something that at least when I was in high school in Ontario was lacking - I know that with my marks in high school and my classes in chemistry and physics, I would've had no problem getting into a good university science program, but my parents and my interests at the age of 17 steered me to study accounting. One of the biggest regrets of my life.

I can conclude that I studied the wrong field, and I think a problem we have, at least in Ontario, is a lack of direction for high school students towards what they should be studying. The only advice we ever received was "study whatever you want, whatever you're passionate about", and they basically said you could end up doing any job at the end of it. The result was many students proclaiming that they were going to study psychology and sociology. In the meantime friends of mine outside Canada already know at the age of 18 what job they're going to have before they start "studying a career". The system in some parts of the world is focused and steers students where they need to go. There was also way too much push to put the students with high marks into university - Fanshawe College, for example, was seen as an alternative if your average was too low to get into Western.

In the meantime, I think Ontario high schools need to promote colleges as a viable alternative. I learned more in one year at Fanshawe than I did in four years at Western.

This is why I'm a big supporter of the apprenticeship style program offered at tech schools. The biggest benefit is that you have a job at a company while going to school to learn.

There has been such a huge push in the past 30 years to get young people brainwashed into thinking that you will only be successful if you go to university. That a lot of industries are starving for labour now because of this.

Universities spend way too much time on theory and never enough time on the practical. Which is what companies are looking for in regards to experience. Companies don't care if you think you know what you are doing. They want to know if you actually do know what you are doing.

But I'm pretty sure if you asked the baby boomers they had the exact same problem when they were younger with not have the experience and finding it next to difficult to find a job in the field they choose. And most probably got that job because of a connection they had with someone or they started working at a company and ended up in a different field.

[The Gibbroni]

I feel for young people entering the job market right now. It's a lot tougher than even during the 80's or 90's recession when at least we didn't have the crippling student debt to deal with. Back then, you could pick up some dick job in the interim without the worry of some $30,000+ debt looming over your head. The banksters are loving the fact that they have wave after wave of debt slaves graduating each year. Good for the bottom line. More low tax voters. (need more money to pay that bank debt! Don't want my fellow citizens gettin' any of my hard-earned cash! I'll give everything to the bank? Yeah! They're on my side!!)

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by The Gibbroni

I feel for young people entering the job market right now. It's a lot tougher than even during the 80's or 90's recession when at least we didn't have the crippling student debt to deal with. Back then, you could pick up some dick job in the interim without the worry of some $30,000+ debt looming over your head.

And that's precisely why I am a full supporter of the Quebec student protests, notwithstanding the violence and rioting. Many people (read: baby boomers) who have accused complaining students of being spoiled brats are completely clueless about the debt situation these students face, coupled with a lousy job market. Student debt is a lose-lose situation for our economy.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by patm

Give it a few more years. Baby Boomers are retireing and we'll see a big shift.

The problem for those of us in our early 20s/late teens is that by the time all of the Baby Boomers retire they'll be looking to hire cheap high school graduates that they can pay less in entry-level jobs, bypassing students who are then in their mid20s. Those of us who have recently graduated from university are really stuck in a bad spot right now.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Another observation I've made is that Canadian employers only accept online applications and refuse to meet applicants in person or even by phone. Meanwhile where I am currently, in-person meetings are not only allowed, but encouraged. Showing up at a business to submit a résumé and meet someone in management on the spot is the way it is done here. Most Canadian companies I've dealt with won't allow it.

Where are young Canadians who actually have work in their field finding work? What has happened to create a situation where finding work in a country with a GDP per capita far lower than Canada's so much easier than in Canada? Why is education valued so little by Canadian employers compared to some other countries? How the heck are Canadians supposed to find work in companies when nobody ever wants to meet them in person and only accepts impersonal applications through the Internet?

I am getting increasingly bitter about the amount of nepotism and lack of value for one's qualifications among Canadian employers, and the impersonal nature of finding employment in Canada.

I don't buy the "impersonal" argument. In Canada, it's all about who you know. For those of us who are introverted, the networking-and-who-you-know model is bad enough, but your preferred method of showing up at the door and meeting potential employers in person is even worse. Instead of a known third party introducing you, you have to go out and do it yourself and risk stammering away nervously while trying to avoid wasting someone's time. The world is oriented enough towards extroverts as it is and we definitely don't need more of it. The fact that Canadian employers encourage online applications is about the only good thing about the way things work here, though unfortunately I think the online application system is just a way to fob off job seekers while they get down to the real business of hiring people they already know.


On a somewhat related note, I find the actual mechanics of most online application systems to be horribly badly designed, which, incidentally, reinforces my belief that they aren't actually being used to hire anyone. Often you're forced to set up an account with a login and a profile just to apply for a job, and it's always the same rigmarole. Lots of them seem to be designed with infernal javascript links, meaning you can't open up multiple jobs in multiple tabs... no, no, you only get to look at one at a time. When I get around to applying and/or filling out a profile I am constantly filling out the same damned information (why someone hasn't yet invented a file type like an expanded .vcf for CVs/resumés that can just be uploaded I sure would like to know). If that weren't bad enough I have been forced to scroll through a drop down box to fill out such things as my country (wtf?), my city (just great... in Ontario we all get to go past Arnprior and Kapuskasing before getting to Ottawa and Toronto), a second language (why would anyone designing a system for Canada not put French at the top rather than leaving it after Finnish?), my university (uncreatively with all the 'University of's listed together), amongst the more usual things like one's province. If you have to type out something like a cover letter, more often than not the text area is some dinky thing three lines deep and 40 characters wide, making it difficult to see what it is you're writing (usually I write it elsewhere and copy it in). Commenting about the lame online application systems is on my list of things to do once hired (after a reasonable period of employment has elapsed, naturally), but I haven't had the opportunity...

[capitalist]

Saskatoon surpasses job creation target

Reported by Trelle Burdeniuk

First Posted: Aug 11, 2012 9:23am | Last Updated: Aug 11, 2012 9:38am

If you're on the hunt for a job, Saskatoon is the place to be as the city has gained 8,200 new jobs since the start of this year.

The Greater Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce has a target of creating 8,000 new jobs in the city every year, but Saskatoon has already reached that target.

"At the beginning of the year, we saw that this was definetly going to be the year that we were going to break through that (8,000) mark, but to see it happen this soon is very exciting," said Christian Braid, president of the Greater Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce.

The Chamber's Target 8000 project is specially designed to help keep new graduates from SIAST and the University of Saskatchewan in the city.

"We're pushing the community to ensure that we're able to retain those people within our community - instead of seeing all that talent go elsewhere."

2012 is on track to be the year with the most jobs created in Saskatoon ever, said Braid.

He said this amount of job growth is good for new graduates looking for work, but also benefits people who already have jobs.

"The more jobs we can create, the more people we have working here in the community, the more people we have contributing to the community."



TBurdeniuk@rawlco.com

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Dado

The fact that Canadian employers encourage online applications is about the only good thing about the way things work here, though unfortunately I think the online application system is just a way to fob off job seekers while they get down to the real business of hiring people they already know.

I'm confused; what exactly is good about online applications when you've got a lot of negative to say about it?

I would categorize myself as a split between extrovert and introvert. I have no problem doing cold calling; my last job in Canada involved a lot of cold calling of prospects.

I will say this: most of the jobs I have gotten in the past have somehow involved meeting a recruiter or manager in person. In some cases they came from showing up at a business asking for a manager. My last job in Canada was one I gained from a job fair where I could meet the manager and recruiter in-person, without any online "interaction". In almost 10 years of working, I have never once gotten a job from applying online. On the other hand, online applications are good for finding jobs outside of your immediate geographical area.

If a company only accepts online applications, then maybe they're a company I don't want to work for. The Home Depot is one of the worst companies for this.

Personal update: I had an interview yesterday near Toronto, I'm not going to predict what will happen but I was recommended by one of my instructors from college. I'm doing some cold call emails to other companies.

Worst come to worst, I borrow money and take some more courses. So many jobs, even in my own fields, require skills that I don't have.

[manny_santos]

Another question...

How much do employers care about whether or not you have a car? Yesterday I had a job interview where I was asked whether I had a car, and being honest, I said no. I know some jobs require a car because of what is involved in the job, but do they want you to have the car before you have the job? The job interview I had was for something pretty much office-based, so I don't see a car being a huge necessity.

Right now I cannot afford a car. I can get a car financed if I wanted to, but I don't even have enough money to pay for one month of insurance. But, how are you supposed to get a job in the first place if you can't afford the cost of a car? Or is it really not that important for most jobs?

I have no problem with buying a car if I have a job offer.

[caltrane74]

I'm planning on setting up my own blogging site. And will be blogging full time, shortly. Just gotta finalize my business plan.

Very exciting, Young people today have so many options.

[freeweed]

I have never heard of employers asking about a car, unless it's specifically required for work - and these situations are rare.

Is it remotely possible they were just "chatting"? ie: getting to know your personal side, see if you're a car guy or something? Seems a bit weird otherwise.