Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

I Like My IT Budget Tight and My Developers Stupid

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the garbage-in-garbage-out dept.

IT 235

Esther Schindler writes "'Who has money to train these guys nowadays? They should be lucky they're still employed, right? Keep thinking that way,' writes Lisa Vaas. The competition applauds your choice to glue your wallet shut. Or, to put this another way: This is why the boss won't pay for developer training. Vaas explains how those still training manage to get their training budgets funded."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Your mom (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077454)

is the whole package

yeah okay (4, Insightful)

Flyerman (1728812) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077456)

Really not trying to troll anyone with that summary.


Re:yeah okay (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077480)

the metasummary says it all about the summary

Re:yeah okay (3, Insightful)

x*yy*x (2058140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077836)

That's why it's inevitable that everything will soon be moved to cheaper countries. That's why US is fighting so hard to get strict copyrights all over the world now, because entertainment is basically the only thing US still has major lead in. But growing amount of people are starting to understand there might be better entertainment than the bubblegum hollywood stuff. The giant is falling and trying to fight back off its inevitable end.

Re:yeah okay (-1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078520)

You do realize that while the US is fighting to get compliance with copyright laws, almost all of them have been pushed by Europe first.

That is to say, the US only changed it's copyright laws to match those or Europe and treaties entered into. In fact, the DMCA clause comes right out of a WIPO treaty that the EU took action on before the US even ratified it into law.

If you must create a scenario, it should be more like, we all agreed to this, why aren't you implementing it. And yes, you can go look at the WIPO treaties and see this for itself. Even the mickeymouse copyright extension act was passed after a treaty was developed in which the EU passed the same legislation called a directive on harmonizing copyright terms. I can cite timelines if you really need them. But I've tossed enough information out there that your google finger should end up painting a pretty clear picture.

Re:yeah okay (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077596)

Speaking of stupid developers - what is it with blogs including hundreds of KB of Javascript for a mostly static page now?!

Just check out the page size there - it's 1.5MB in size uncompressed (532KB compressed) for a pretty short article in a plain-looking page. Not only that but it pulls in scripts and documents from all over the web, slowing page loads even more..

Re:yeah okay (-1, Troll)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077676)

oh gee i don't know maybe it's the Google Analytics accounts running, or jQuery being used to make the UI of that blog appealing, or - hey - i don't know gee maybe it's a bunch of stuff that DEVELOPERS know how to use and YOU DON'T.

in order to do one simple trick with jQuery, such as animating hidden elements into visibility, you have to load the whole base jQuery library. might have known that if you knew what the fuck you were talking about. would it lower the page size to strip out what you need from the library? sure. would it be faster for the developer, and therefore more profitable, to the site owner? no, it wouldn't.

quit your whining and get off dial-up, you should count yourself lucky you have something so stupid to complain about. i bet you complain that your dentist has to put his/her hands in your mouth too. mouthbreather.

Re:yeah okay (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077794)

You're a fucktard. Why *does* an article like this need jQuery at all? Waste of time and space.

Re:yeah okay (1)

x*yy*x (2058140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077894)

For example for the comment box, which is quite nice with its real time updating, image adding etc.

Yeah yeah, we get off your lawn now...

Re:yeah okay (2)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077938)

Moreover, jQuery is only 57254 bytes in size, about a 10th of the total size the parent poster is complaining about.

As for stripping out unneeded functionality from js libraries, that probably wouldn't affect page load times significantly, but if it's a high-traffic site, it would reduce the monthly bandwidth bill, so it might be worth it (not if it's a low-traffic site though). Of course, the downside of this is that jQuery is frequently loaded from other locations, or reused (you might already have it in memory from another site you visited recently), so making a custom version will eliminate those benefits.

As for Eponymous, he deserves the troll mod he got. What an ass.

Re:yeah okay (1)

WaywardGeek (1480513) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077808)

What kills me is that to make a comment like that puts you in the group of people too smart to need developer training. When was the last time you didn't know more about new trends than your prof? Do slash-dotters really whine about night/weekend education budgets? Would we learn more in some community college class, or designing the world's next generation AI?

Re:yeah okay (3, Interesting)

Fulcrum of Evil (560260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078216)

When was the last time you didn't know more about new trends than your prof?

Why the hell would an undergrad prof be teaching new trends? And yes, the prof usually knows a lot more than me in the area he teaches, that's why he's the prof and I go to his class. Meanwhile, training is focused on something small, like SVN or a dev methodology. No profs anywhere.

Re:yeah okay (1)

WaywardGeek (1480513) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078280)

So, skip class, download SVN source code, along with Mercurial, git, and bzr. Compare not just the functionality, speed, portability, and ease of use, but look at the code. Compare the styles, and figure out what kind of code you want to write. Granted, profs usually do know more about their field, but the future will be built by hackers too bored to do the assigned homework.

Re:yeah okay (2)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078426)

It is not about the training, it is about being able to substantiate your skills. Quality certification enables you to publicly substantiate your skill set, everything else is just a abstract claim until your skills are proven, or not, on the job.

Of course the other main claim to coding skills is contributing to open source software, where your personal contributions are properly attributed.

Outside of that you are relying on references from you current company, somewhat tricky (don't get that job your applying for and as a bonus you end up losing your current job for being unreliable) as references can be purposefully less than positive (the only time in competitive industries to give a glowing review is when you want to get rid of someone ie screw the opposition). There are also customer references, where you have dealt direct with customers and built a reputation.

For those coders treated like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed bullshit), with no public recognition, shifting jobs is difficult especially if you also want to shift localities, another state or country.

Re:yeah okay (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078146)

I find it helpful to use privoxy. The learning curve is something you only have to face once, and being free of ads and tracking while using any browser you like makes it worthwhile. Taking responsibility for your own system beats bitching at people for coding their own websites the way they see fit, hands down.

Re:yeah okay (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078334)

OK, I'll bite. vanilla site browsing without NoScript and enabling HTTP Sniffer, there are some really serious competency reality check here. 313,609Kb javascript alone per hit just to support, ajax, Facebook and comment hook api when WP blog article itself is less than 17Kb...


Re:yeah okay (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078462)

I do use no script when in firefox and not scripts in opera. Why would I bother with allowing untrusted sites to run js, unless there is compelling content to be had and I trust them? I normally disable javascript for slashdot, too because it gets in the way otherwise. The only drawback is you cant see the moderation breakdowns, but if I really want to see that I can still temporarily enable it.

Re:yeah okay (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077928)

I stop reading as soon as she conflated IT people/SharePoint certs and "Developers". Not that either one is better than the other but these are not even the same department.

Re:yeah okay (1)

superwiz (655733) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077952)

Sadly, there is a very prominent company in which those are the same.

Re:yeah okay (2)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077992)

Hurray for Slashdot and its never ending ads for blogs.

I like my IT budget like I like my women... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078244)

Tight and stupid.

Re:yeah okay (3, Informative)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078092)

This is only the case in certain companies.

You might as well summarize the article as "incompetent people don't know what they're doing"

Slashdot's "No Shit Week" continues.

Re:yeah okay (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078182)

Isn't that supposed to be "No Shit, Sherlock Week"? Actually, I suspect we may have entered the "No Shit, Sherlock Decade" around 2007.

and its why (0)

chronoss2010 (1825454) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077470)

YOUR company sucks ass, and no one but bottom of the barrel applies its the same policy as the US govt uses and why it too sucks ass. JUST ask SONY how dipshits work out.

WTF (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077474)

It's a sign that developers are shit when they can't learn things from books and the bountiful resources available on the Internet. Sending everybody to university has only given us developers that can't do research or think because half of them have no natural drive, ability or enthusiasm for programming.

Re:WTF (2)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077554)

In general I agree, but requiring that developers learn something they need for work on their own in their free time isn't really fair, developers have lives too, so at the very least the budget should include time for developers to read up on these things in their working hours.

Re:WTF (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077724)

cross training.

the guy seems to have a lot of bad developers though, the kind that if they stop developing for a while can no longer do it.

Re:WTF (1)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077918)

Huh, -1 Interesting. Now I just need to see a +5 troll!

this was approved? (0)

sneakyimp (1161443) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077478)

I saw this among the submissions and am amazed it made it through. So much for the moderation process.

Re:this was approved? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077802)

I saw this among the submissions and am amazed it made it through. So much for the moderation process.

If you think the subject doesn't represent the actual thinking of many managers you are naive. Many /. readers that are living it.

Maybe you have it better. Good for you. Show us all the way by not being a penis.

Why Train? (3, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077498)

When they'll do it themselves on their own time and their own dime?

Re:Why Train? (1)

drpimp (900837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077616)

No doubt, and then you can always move on to greener pastures (with your new found skill set) and not have to feel any guilt of using resources from your employer (or some kind of deal to stay for X amount of time) and pat yourself on the back for being assertive with your ever growing quest of nerdiness ... errr ahhh IT knowledge.

Re:Why Train? (4, Insightful)

williamhb (758070) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077630)

When they'll do it themselves on their own time and their own dime?

It depends on the topic. It is quite likely that the more interested engineers will teach themselves Scala or some other hot language after hours. It is much less likely that they will spend their home time learning how to integrate with AcmeHorribleLegacySystem or FooCorpProprietaryTechTheyCantAccess that you need your software to work with in order for your business to earn cash. And it's not terribly easy to direct what people learn after hours -- half the replies to this post might well say "Scala??? Why would you want to learn that, ${OtherTrendingLanguage} is the way of the future!".

The bigger problem with training from my perspective it that it is usually so dumbed down and slow.

Mod parent up. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077732)

Not only that, but training is different from experience.

Do you want someone who's gone to a week long class about whatever or someone who's been working on whatever for a year?

So there is SOME logic to hiring as opposed to training. You already have people who can explain the weirdness of your existing systems to the new person.

But just because there's some logic to it does not make it the best course. Instead, you should DEMAND that they read books (that you bought) and pass certifications (that you pay for) and then use those skills on side projects.

The more they know, the better they'll function.

Re:Mod parent up. (5, Insightful)

uptownguy (215934) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077818)

Not only that, but training is different from experience.

Not only that, but people often muddy the issue by confusing the terms education (attending a class, studying to pass a cert test) with training (hands on, real-world experience).

To help clarify the difference, a colleague of mine once put it this way... if you are having trouble drawing a distinction between education and training: Just think of your teenage daughter and how you would feel if her school offered sex education vs. sex training...

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077998)

Basically, "education" deals with theory, and teaches you the fundamentals of some field of study. It doesn't teach you the very latest goings-on, but it gives you a solid foundation to learn that stuff on your own.

"Training" is basically monkey-see-monkey-do: someone shows you exactly how to do something, and you repeat it. This is useful when, for instance, showing a factory worker how to operate a machine.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

BoogeyOfTheMan (1256002) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078368)

That was the first comment to make me laugh out loud in a long time, thank you good sir.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

bosef1 (208943) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078536)

Just think of your teenage training...

I find your ideas interesting, and would like to subscribe to your magazine.

Re:Mod parent up. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077846)

If one is demanding that they do these things then they have every right to bill one for the time they spend doing it.

Re:Why Train? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077976)

The engineers might not even want to bother learning applicable stuff off-hours, and might want to learn something different. For instance, if the engineer is a C++ applications developer, he might want to learn some PIC assembly at home for an embedded project, or perhaps some PHP/mysql to set up his own website for some hobby purpose, rather than learning the latest stuff about ${currentlyPopularC++Library}. Speaking as an engineer, we frequently like to spend our off time learning about something that's technical, but not directly related to what we do at work during the day, whether it's a totally different area of programming, or whether it's a different field of engineering altogether (such as building your own CNC machine and doing machining at home, or building an electric car).

Re:Why Train? (2)

YojimboJango (978350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078028)

From first hand experience I know this to be true.

When I get home and want to tinker with something, I know my bosses at work would love it if I spent a bunch of time learning perl so I could come to work and work on those ancient obfuscated scripts. What they don't understand is that I play with python in my free time specifically because I don't want to have to be the guy that has to deal with that mess. If they sent me off to do some training I'd be more than happy to go, but it's like the article said. I'm instantly profitable racking up hours doing C#, let the grizzled veterans sort out the 15 year old legacy perl (they do a better job of it than I could anyways please please please don't ever retire and make me do it).

Re:Why Train? (2)

Fulcrum of Evil (560260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078224)

Maybe if they offered more money...

Most developer training is useless. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077504)

Most developer training is absolutely useless. For any recent technology, unless you've got one of the engineers directly from the vendor teaching you, you're likely only going to be dealing with a consultant or lecturer that has read a book on the subject, and has maybe played with the technology in question for a week or two.

The time is better spent in the trenches, going to battle with the technology you want to learn about. You'll need to fight with it. You'll need to grab it by the testes and twist it into what you need it to be; into what you need it to do. You will learn so much more than if you sit in a room with a bunch of your co-workers and listen to the lecturer ramble on, using one unrealistic micro-example after another.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (5, Insightful)

Palmsie (1550787) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077602)

It sounds like your experience with training is more about poor training environments than it is about the usefulness of training itself. Training is supposed to... well, train you. Train you for what? For actually using the software in real environments for real problems and creating real solutions. If the training isn't accomplishing this it may be that the training company/trainer/consultant is garbage.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (2)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077744)

it may be that the majority of training providers are garbage, hence the sentiment that training is useless. if useful training were more prevalent than not, wouldn't you see more comments in favor? i took a class on android development, but it was good for theory only. the anonymous coward above is right: if you don't have a use for a technology then just reading about it, or watching a demo, isn't going to turn on any lightbulbs for you. training doesn't show you what to do when things go wrong (the most valuable kind of knowledge btw), just how to make a simple use case go right. in the end, training sessions don't do much more than pique the interest of the few who are willing to apply the new tech themselves -- they don't replace hours of search engine joyriding to find out how to make the pos work how you want it to. going to training does not make you proficient at the subject.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078022)

Most employees who are smart are able to train themselves. Especially if the upcoming training is weeks away and an employee can learn all they need from some books, or even a trainer's slides. If the trainer comes from the vendor directly more often than not they're going to be proselytizing. If they're a consultant, they'll be reciting from a book.

The time when training is good for smart people is when they already know about the subject and can ask relevant questions.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078266)

The time when training is good for smart people is when they already know about the subject and can ask relevant questions.

The other time I think training is good for smart people is when it involves something completely different than what they normally do. (And no, I'm not talking about a Windows developer who knows nothing about Android development). I'm getting at broadening your experience, like a developer learning something about project management, or a help-desk guy learning something about scripting languages. There's always barriers to overcome when you're in what's essentially a new field, and training helps overcome that.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077776)

there are good ones? no I'm not trolling its a serious question...

Re:Most developer training is useless. (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077960)

Well, most of the time you are in a class with a lot of other people and the level of the class will reflect their average skill. A lot of the corporate training I've seen has been crutches for people who can't figure it out on their own, people that have drawn the short straw and say "really, I know nothing about this I need some training at least". Very often the advanced topics only give you one specialization when what you'd really want is a general course on speed, either in half the time or going twice as complex. Practically though they typically hold courses more often and better geographically distributed rather than divide it that way. So yes, for the most part I've said give me access to the tech, the docs and if I can't whip something up relatively quickly, then we'll look at a class.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078190)

I agree with the AC; there is such a thing as good corporate training? I have never seen it.

I actually enjoy learning things from class, and in the University environment it had many advantages over teaching yourself, the biggest of which are:
* Feedback (questions and grading) corrects false understanding quicker.
* A good curriculum ensures that there aren't any big gaps in your understanding.
* A fixed schedule prevents it from always being pushed to the bottom of your priorities.

None of the corporate training I have seen has those properties. The courses are too short to be comprehensive, or too condensed to have time to apply anything you learn, discover things you thought you understood but didn't, and thus have questions to ask.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (3, Interesting)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078312)

It's also worth pointing out that while the summary, and to a certain extent the article, focuses on traditional "become a certified Share Point guru" sorts of training; there's a strong undercurrent of people "training" in the sense of just being given on the clock time to learn stuff and play with tech. At least one company is specifically mentioned as having a policy similar to Google's "20%" where they expect their tech employees to spend 20% of their time (on the clock) learning, working on personal projects, and generally unwinding. This company has seem efficiency gains rather than loses since implementing the policy. The majority of the article does focus on the kind of training that a lot of slashdotters consider useless (I don't entirely agree, but I can see the point), but there's definitely kernels of wisdom floating around in there too.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077718)

Yes, Seargeant Gung-ho, that was a rather inspiring speech there. But, as somebody above already pointed out, not all of us are willing to spend our "free" time working for free, as many of us have wives or kids or school or even lives to worry about.

I guffaw'd when I saw a recent job opening which stated specifically that the applicant (working in-house, not a consultant) must have their own Labview license. Huh, that's rich. Not only do they want us to work from home, now they're gonna make us buy all the hardware and software too. Power supplies, oscilloscopes, Network and vector analyzers worth almost a hundred-thousand dollars. Then they'll make us print their paperwork at home, with our own overpriced ink cartridges. Might as well just start your own business at that point.

This shit has to stop.

-- Ethanol

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077768)

It will stop when people refuse to do it and they can't find anyone who will meet their ridiculous commands.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077786)

Stupid question - if you're not willing to put in what other people are, why should you be rewarded comparably?

Re:Most developer training is useless. (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078370)

Stupid answer: I already have a job with people that value my skills and are willing to do their part (Compensate me, purchase the tools I require to work on their systems, etc). I'm simply simply not going to even consider a move to such a clearly sociopathic employer. They can hire people who aren't bright enough to understand their own value. Most of whom tend to quickly morph into (if they aren't already) the kind of mindless, soulless automata those companies both deserve, and can't understand why they have. I and anyone I can successfully warn off won't fall for the trap.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (3, Insightful)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077854)

There is more to training than "time spent in the trenches"

- learning a new language/paradigm often allows you to think of your current language/environment in new ways
- often at a conference/training there will be BOF sessions and/or Q&As that are worth a lot more than the training/conference themselves, but if you're not there you won't see them
- at a conference/training you can expand your network, so next time your company is hiring you can remember that person xxx at course yyy was great to work with and you can try to refer them
- if your company sends you to an expensive conference/training it's saying that they care about your career enough to invest in it, rather than treating you like a shelf-limited resource
- training/conferences can expose you to different areas that you would not necessarily work in, and often this exposure translates in insights directly applicable to your area

of course the % of companies that actually see their employees as a valuable resource instead of as an easily replaced cog is exceedingly small, after all companies that force developers to work on antiquated PCs with postage-stamp monitors and on rickety dollar store chairs aren't likely to spend 3-4k/year + time off for their education...

Re:Most developer training is useless. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077994)

There's 2 different types of training. There's the cram-and-barf training that gets you a piece of paper that you can hang on your cubicle wall. Almost all of that type of training is useless.

Then there's the other type of training. A lot of modern technologies are very large and if you attempt to pick them up on your own on your own time and your own dime, you're likely not to get the full benefit. You'll go in trying to use the same tactics that worked on the last product, and dig some pretty deep holes before you actually learn the philosophy well enough to be good at it. And, unfortunately, if you're like me, those holes will exist in important production systems.

A structured training approach can help avoid that. In my case, that means a full classroom, not just a Flash demo, even though classrooms put me to sleep. Classrooms are a lot harder to fast-forward over critical parts or drop in the middle just because someone wandered in. They also give a better understanding, because you can discuss things with fellow students and the instructor. And frankly, I could care less about the paper on the wall if I can learn enough to understand some of the whys instead of just the wherefors.

Sadly, TFA is spending most of its time promoting the other kind. Which is cheaper, but, alas not cheap enough in an era where we want Everything, we want it Now, and we want it all for Free. So we end up with neither.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (4, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078410)

They also tend to force you to not do the "I'ma skip this chapter, because I know this stuff" that often plagues my attempts at self training. Sometimes suffering through the chapter with the stuff you know can help put something in perspective, give you some critical insight on how this implementation is in fact slightly different than what you thought you knew, or just give you a critical refresher you didn't think you needed. I can and have forced myself to read that chapter anyway, but I know I'm not giving it the attention it deserves. In a classroom you have little else to do anyway, so you generally pay attention; and sometimes go "Oh, hey, I hadn't thought about that. Glad we did this part after all".

Re:Most developer training is useless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078194)

I tend to agree, with a few caveats. I think there's some great training available, but it's by and large provided by people who actually do the thing they're teaching for. That might mean a short conference, a seminar, or a University course. Very rarely does that come from a for-profit training outfit.

Re:Most developer training is useless. (3, Interesting)

kbielefe (606566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078488)

I've been pretty impressed by the training my company has been able to put together lately.

  • Seth Hallem, founder and former CEO of Coverity [] came to teach us about their static analysis tool.
  • Dan Saks [] came to teach us about embedded software best practices.
  • Scott Meyers [] came to teach us about using the STL effectively.
  • James Grenning [] came to teach us about test driven development.
  • Michael Barr [] came to teach us about real time scheduling.

Most of these guys are well respected in their fields, and while not exactly famous, are names I had seen more than once in connection with those topics. All of them spent some time looking at our company's needs specifically before doing the training in order to customize it for us. Our company isn't small, but not huge either. We have around 1600 employees, a few hundred of which took the training. It has really helped us revitalize a lot of our old school techniques. If a company our size can put a line up of training like that together, it ought to be within reach of most mid-size organizations.

Tight & Stupid... (1, Funny)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077548) my women.

(Sorry. I just couldn't resist.)

Re:Tight & Stupid... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077590)

How dare you demean women like this! You womanizer!

Would you pay to train a hooker to suck? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077636)

This is why I always conceptualize employment as a prostitute vs. john situation.

Re:Would you pay to train a hooker to suck? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077706)

Well, I'd certainly be willing to train her on the particular techniques that give me maximum pleasure ;-)

Re:Would you pay to train a hooker to suck? (1)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078180)

You probably wouldn't pay to do it, you'd simply not use her services again. But then she's a contractor.

If you were a pimp however, and she was "yo' bitch", you might find some method of training her to make sure "the bitch has yo money". You may keep the pimp hand strong, but she'll make more if she at least knows what she's doing.

Re:Would you pay to train a hooker to suck? (2)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078104)

Well in a Sex worker/Customer relationship? No.

However, what if you are a pimp/brothel owner? These are your employees. A girl who learns to suck a mean cock may fetch a lot more business in the long term than one who uses too much teeth.

I doubt that some basic level of training isn't quite common in such relationships.

Loser (1)

Grindalf (1089511) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077656)

Most companies that have leaders that do not understand their principal technology, and working relationships fail. You cannot make an adaptable organization that changes with the environment and handles complex products on the basis of this type of dependancy culture. I have a great deal of experience in this field. It is also a good idea to hit the ground running when starting a job by reading up on the enviroments that you will work with - i.e. by reading manuals as this is better than "training" as computing is informationally dense. Without the investment, intelligent leadership and book learning you will fail.

Article was written like crap (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077666)

But it totally misses the reasoning, at least in my field. Wireless telecom has very large variety of equipment that is vendor specific, or protocol specific and I have never seen a comprehensive field of classes out there besides the vendors that supply the equipment. Due to this, and nobody wanting to lock themselves in small segment tied to only one vendor, they do not spend their own money to learn it all. My experience was starting from college with an IT background, and a smart manager hiring me fresh, because back then he knew the seperate telecom world was going to clash with IT, while the old guys did not think they needed to know anything about IP.

They sent everyone to trainiung, at least a couple times. The ones who did not appear to use the knowledge, or even retain stayed on the bottom tiers while those who did grow got promotions, and eventually left the operations group to engineering.

I stuck with that company for awhile, then management changed, and with it their beliefs. I no longer received training, and I started to stagnate as an employee, since instead of giving us project's for things we knew, but they would rather hire from outside than promote/train from within. This saves the bottom line on the short term, but with that mindset also changes the mindset of the employee's. Now instead of everyone wanting to stay with company it was valid that the only way to move ahead was to change employers. People coming into the same company demanded higher salaries than an internal promotion would get, and the cycle continued. Now that company is suffering, in particular having a problem with retention. I too have since left, to another company that still helps me grow, and with that I help my current employer grow. I like it here!

So no, the company doesn't want its employee's to be stupid but they fail to see the long term effect their plan gives. In my experience it changed Netops/engineering from a group of faithful employee's who could see a future with them, into the departments having a revolving door.

Re:Article was written like crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078286)

The plural of employee is employees. No apostrophes.

Re:Article was written like crap (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078486)

hahaha sounds so familiar.

It's the new way of running business. Owner hired an operations manager with those beliefs, hired tons of useless, extremely high paid people, fired everyone who was competent as he saw them as useless as their pay was lower. fired my boss because he believed they could do better by hiring an ITT tech graduate. They added a new role and hired a consultant from Las Vegas who had no experience with server 2003 let alone 2008, ignored everything I said, treated me as if I had no idea what I was doing. Then when I quit, they hired an ITT tech graduate.

a year and a half later, their network is in shambles, the turnover rate is about 1 month, the people in the lowest parts of the company get paid MINIMUM wage, and they've got five lawsuits on their hands now (why he hired the operations manager in the first place, to avoid this) because they hired unqualified employees because qualified employees they'd have to pay more than minimum wage. So after these employees let a few people die on their watch (this was an adult care company) shit got worse.

All of this to cut costs! but they ended up spending so much more money going with cloud computing and overpaid lofty bullshit positions where those people just look at porn all day and take vacations every 2 weeks.

Bonus! They cancelled all water services because "buying water jugs for the office coolers was just too expensive" instead they bought $1000 pallets of water bottles to distribute amongst all the locations, and were shocked that after a day that all the water bottles were used up. So they started buying $5,000 worth of pallets. week, tops.

Water service: $50 location at the most. less if they were leasing a filtration machine that just used tap water and filtered it (lol, doesnt filter anything.)

It's the new business mentality, driven by egotistical morons who do generous rounding in their heads and make up imaginary numbers to cut costs rather than sit down and analyze the costs, and spending where necessary and saving where necessary.

on an IT related note: The new IT guys quadrupled the IT spending budget after we left. We ran it, willingly, on a shoestring budget, and only got expensive stuff where necessary, and made sure it came with warranties. These idiots built custom built PCs, invested heavily in tens of thousands of dollars of cisco equipment that sat around, and a lot of it was unaccounted for after they were fired. What they did replace with cisco equipment broke the network badly, and rid of any cost effective solutions we implemented. Funny how fast your former employer begs for help when sending a file across a windows domain in the same office takes 45 minutes due to networking clusterfucks and improperly configured devices. Not that I helped them, I do not want to even go near that nightmare.

Yes, the only way to get up in the company after that was to leave, and that's what I did. I get paid a little less now, but I bring home more due to commission, and I am a lot better now than I was at that old company.

As an IT Manager (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077686)

I welcome my idiot colleagues that take this approach. To an IT pro, training is as valuable a method of retaining good staff as offering more money. Being proactive and obtaining training for your staff tells them you actually give a damn about them and their future, whether with the company or not, which promotes loyalty in employees who recognize the effort and, lo and behold, INCREASES the chances of retaining talent.

Those that don't care are likely to move on anyway regardless of what you do. Those that only work for money and don't want training aren't the kind of employees I want on my staff anyway (the only exception being those that go home at the end of the day and do their job as a hobby as well).

Ultimately this approach is self-defeating as the staff is untrained on evolving technology. Not only will the talent leave, those that are left are incapable of handling new projects that Management demands making you, as the manager, look like a FOOL when you can't deliver.

Re:As an IT Manager (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077762)

Paid time off for training plus certs I would consider tantamount to vacation time, and would appreciate it.

Last training I went to was for SunCluster, and there was some neat hardware to play with in the lab, and the instructor was actually pretty solid. Got to do some extracurricular HBA tweaking as well as one of the other students' systems wasn't recognizing the one in his workstation.

Plus, A5000 arrays, which I just think are neat even though their capacity can be matched or exceeded by desktop drives these days.

That word's not in my dictionary (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077702)

I hear tell of these training budgets, and yet in 19 years of working for various companies I've actually gone on maybe 3 courses ever. So it's nice to know everyone's being brought down to my level...

You don't need a certification to know something (2)

Megor1 (621918) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077704)

This article seems to be about selling you that paper certifications are something you need for your employees. Anyone who has interviewed or worked with many of the people with these certifications knows that they are worthless. My favorite was a MCSE that didn't know how to install a video card driver. What matters is that the people can actually do the work, if they self taught/apprenticed I'll take them anyday over a certification

Re:You don't need a certification to know somethin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077874)

Not everything is a well known certification. As I said in my earlier post, in some fields the only way to gain advanced knowledge of vendor specific pieces of equipment or protocols is to work with the equipment a long time and figure things out by trial and error(outages) or take a vendor supplied coarse. At the end of the training, the "certificate" is a piece of paper you will likely throw away/forget about, but having time in a lab with an instructor from the vendor, many times the same guys who work with the developers with every software change(since they only have one lab) is invaluable.

My current employer did not see any of those certificates of completing a class, and they were just a random bullet point on my resume that they did not even seem to read when I applied. But when they tested my knowledge by asking questions about a Nortel(Now Ericson) MSC and the eBSC behind it, as well as troubleshooting SS7(along with all normal IP engineering). I had answers, I had those answers at my previous company too, but they decided that I was only as smart as the title I already held, and was treated as such for longer than I should have put up with it.

Re:You don't need a certification to know somethin (4, Insightful)

YojimboJango (978350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078176)

Your comment is telling.

You're not sending your good employees (you know, the ones that you already know are intelligent) out to get certs. You're attempting to hire talent that already comes pre-trained so you don't have to do it. Anyone can fake their way through a class and memorize questions for a test, your goal should be to know your workers and send the ones that show promise off.

Find that smart kid from ops who seems to spend his days fixing printers and ghosting machines and send him out to get a MSCE. You'll probably wind up with half decent net admin when you're done. Hiring some mouth breather just because he paid for a cert and you've got a 95% chance of failure.

Actually that could be a way to weed out cert idiots, just ask them who paid for the cert. If it's their last employer it could be an indicator that they saw some talent there. Food for thought that.

Re:You don't need a certification to know somethin (1)

Matthew Weigel (888) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078208)

I think you're making a logical error. You are comparing the value of the certificate as a predictor of success (that is, how much - if any - weight to give their degrees and certifications when deciding whether to hire them) and the value of the training process - yes, completely ignoring the certificate at the end - for someone that you've already hired and whose ability is not in question.

The question isn't whether someone with less intelligence or no experience in the subject matter can become an expert on a subject from a training program; the question is whether the smart and knowledgeable person you hired (let's at least assume that you hired someone who meets your standards, and have ruled out potential hires that would not cut the mustard without the certification or degree) can come out with much more and deeper knowledge of the subject.

Give your people raises. (5, Insightful)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077770)

No secret, the only way to get a decent raise is to jump ship. No one gets up the ladder at one company. Get experience, go to another job and get the raise you should have gotten, then get more experience, jump ship again.

I worked for two fortune 100 companies, and people would quit, and then they'd be back in 2-3 years. Earning 30% more.

Companies would rather hire an outsider with paper experience than give someone who knows the company a big enough raise to keep them. I even went for salary matching once and got a counter offer $8k less.

Pay me what I'm worth, and the certifications won't lead me away. Otherwise I'm skipping back and forth, chasing a decent raise.

Re:Give your people raises. (1)

M0j0_j0j0 (1250800) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077828)

You sir, thumbs up!

Re:Give your people raises. (2)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078480)

Fuck that, I quit, my pay went up more than 20% the next day, and my stress went down.

And I wasn't making exactly below market when I quit, And it was a bad economy.

And the best thing corporate training sessions are for, especially things like the 'free' oracle developer days, and similar shit, is for networking. Make friends with people from the other companies, get cards and/or email addresses. Keep in touch with the assholes who leave your company. Thats how you land the good jobs.

The pimps will get you in, they may even get you in at or slightly above market, but your the contacts can usually do you better.

And remember your career is your fucking responsibility, not your manager's. If your manager gets you training, or gives you time for self training, goody. If not, who the fuck cares. Take charge and train yourself, because ultimately you have to take care of your own shit.

Playgrounds are also needed (1)

jacobsm (661831) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077806)

While training is usually useful (but one can also learn by RTFM'ing) local playgrounds where a developer or systems administrator can have some actual hands on experience is even more vital.

The death of Middle Management (4, Interesting)

Wolfling1 (1808594) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077812)

Great swathes of middle management tiers were slashed during the early 90s in a vain attempt to show shareholders that organisations were more 'lean'. This senior management mentality left many organisations with no one who knew their business systems from a management perspective, and no one glueing together the corporate culture.

The unappreciated middle manager was the guy (pardon the sexist reference, but before the 90s, they mostly were guys) who established business systems and then went about implementing and policing them. For some strange reason, senior managers believed that they could replace this critical part of the organisation with code-cutters.

For a limited time it worked. You can make burgers with a robotic arm. However, it eventually started to slide sideways when people realised that their career was not going to be furthered by a performance management spreadsheet, and when their workmates were being retrenched by e-mail, the workers went into open revolt. Through no fault of their own, the IT workers were blamed for this loss of corporate identity - and the IT retrenchments that followed Y2K were testament to the corporate beliefs.

Now, ten years has passed, and this article has surfaced about 20 times. Despite its title, its NOT about training IT boffins. Its about trying to rebuild the middle management layer. People like Lisa Vaas have realised that the only viable candidates for the role are the IT people. They are the only ones who understand the business systems, and are the only ones who interact with the business on a horizontal plane instead of a vertical one.

Sadly, senior management are still trying to woo the shareholders with their clever cost cutting measures. And they feel more than a little threatened by the IT folk who know all their dirty little secrets. I doubt that any training gleaned by this approach will be more useful than a PHP refresher. Worse still, that is all that Lisa is asking for - when really, the IT crowd are the only ones holding the corporate life preserver these days.

Re:The death of Middle Management (3, Insightful)

DDLKermit007 (911046) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078284)

The funny thing that I've noticed is that management at the big corps still don't care about this. I've been watching this specific scenario happen over and over. IT turns into a kludge due to a lack of direction (those managers you speak of missing), and for whatever reason these companies think the answer is cutting costs even further. How they are doing it? Outsourcing! Your local helpdesk to India or Philippines, and your local IT people? Pushed over to the outsource company if they are techs, and if they are coders, engineers, etc. they have been getting the axe. They end up replacing them all with overworked people from the outsourcing company who come in with no clue about the buisness, likely will never set foot on their buisnesses property, and think all of that will make things better.

Larger corporations really have quite the hatred for the very people they need to make the wheels go round, and it makes no sense to me. They all end up getting burned anyways. They either end up having to kick the outsource group out on their ass, and try to kiss ass to their employees they just screwed, stagnate since projects to push the company forward cost the outsource group money when what's in place "works right now", or even more comically, they end up bringing on an VIP IT staff specifically to manage the higher up's ideas and problems since the outsource companies won't do a damn thing an SLA doesn't make them do, CIOs know this, but run with it anyways for that bonus before they jump ship.

It's getting much worse before it'll get better...

Re:The death of Middle Management (2)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078466)

I've been in IT since 386/486 days and it has been a steady decline ever since. I work for a global company and I'm one of only two network admins *total*. In fact the entire corporate IT staff is eight including the helpdesk and server admins. However, we have 6 managers including the CIO. That is almost a manager per person and the managers are not technical. IT depts have become so lean and skimpy but those at the top manage to cling to their titles and positions even to the detriment of everything else.

24/7 on-call, skeleton crews, over-worked, micromanaged, little to no respect for knowledge or professionalism, travel, and insane demands. The field itself is broken and is only going to get much worse with companies now dropping CIOs and making IT the bitches of each dept. directly... and those are Fortune 500 companies making these moves. I've honestly reached the end of my career in this field and after I leave my current position I plan on changing paths completely... not that much else is any better right now.

It's only a matter of time before BRIC has decimated the US and we are in for some rough days ahead. Hopefully it will force a reset on a lot of broken systems and policies.

It's a game theory problem (5, Interesting)

mwfischer (1919758) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077910)

Let's make a moron matrix.

Miserable environment + no further education = going to leave (unless they're morons. the dumb ones get comfortable and will stay and continue to shit all over the place) You lose in productivity and group morale as everyone hates IT or Joe User tries to fix things on their own making things even worse.

Miserable environment + education = probably going to leave after "free training" (read - opportunity cost). If you're going to run a shit hole, run a shit hole. Don't randomly throw them a bone. They'll make it into a ladder. Simply bad / clueless management does this.

Great environment + no education = probably going to learn on your own to be happy. The law of diminishing returns applies here. It's going to suck soon unless you pay them / give a title / whatever makes the little buggers happy. You're soaking management / planning costs here. Managers are more expensive than grunts.

Great environment + education = you're going to keep them longer. LoDR also applies here, but the effect is slower.

As an employee, make your mistakes on someone else's dime. When you used up all internal opportunity, bail to greener pastures.

As a director you have a choice. You can get by making a technology barren revolving door shit hole (and don't forget how it messes with the entire org system morale). You lose productivity in having to get new people to adapt but you don't spend "visible" dollars.

As a director you can make a genuine nice place to work. Give education opportunities, make a nice organic learning culture, and treat people with respect. Hire those who will support this structure. You spend "visible" dollars on training and gain "invisible" dollars on productivity rates, retention, and expertise. The worker will become more efficient over time. You will slowly spend more visible dollars on cost of living / regular raises and promotions but efficiency will increase until it plateaus. If they earn, they earn. Else, into the woodchopper you go.

As usual, it depends (4, Interesting)

starfishsystems (834319) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077950)

First, let me address something important and then set it aside. Training is for monkeys. Education is for humans.

Okay. This is a field in which rapid turnover of skill requirements is a given. Therefore, staff will not be able to deliver their best unless they are provided with the means to keep their skills fresh and relevant. I realize that even such a basic proposition as this will have its detractors, but frankly, they're idiots. There isn't much more to discuss on that front.

On the other hand, there's lots to discuss when it comes to finding effective means for staff to maintain relevant skills. I remember how shocked I was when I first got out of university and went on some of the technical courses required and paid by my industry employer. Hour for hour, the cost was at least 50 times higher than what I had paid for course time at university. And the content was laughably thin. And the instructors usually cut a few corners, because the students, for the most part, were disinterested. This was in 1980 when hardware vendors provided courses in their own operating systems. Yes, in principle it was a good idea to provide this important aspect of product support. In practice, the approach was exceedingly inefficient.

Good documentation was to become an even better idea. Take the original Unix documentation for example. It wasn't a course in system design, but if you had a reasonably general systems background you could rely on the documentation to fill in the specifics. And you could learn what you needed to know at your own pace. And it was free. All you needed was time. Most vendors became very committed to documentation. I'm not sure what was happening in the training industry at the time, because for decades I never ran into a situation which needed it.

As time passed, however, a different trend began to assert itself. Consumer products gradually began to ship with less and less documentation. Most of what remained seemed to consist of legal disclaimers. On the industrial side of the fence, a similar trend followed about a decade later. Vendor literature is fancier than ever, but also considerably more vacuous. There are lots of pretty screenshots explaining what form fields to fill out, but not what the fields mean or what processing is taking place behind the facade, much less to provide an analysis of the general case.

In other words, the state of vendor documentation today is what vendor training was like thirty years ago. And this is good business, because if you want anything more, you're going to have to pay for it. Alas, the training is no better than the documentation. It's worse, perhaps, for anyone whose reading speed is faster than human speech.

Given this dismal state of affairs, I can see why employers don't find a lot of value in sending their staff off for training, especially if they have to travel to some distant city for several days. But don't let them throw the baby out with the bathwater! There are many other channels of education apart from the training industry. Some are enormously better value. You simply have to be willing to explore them. Conferences are a traditional example, as are university extension courses. I'm personally in favor of exchange programs, where organizations in the same sector allow their staff to trade places or engage in projects of common interest.

We should regard such undertakings as characteristic of our profession, and show some initiative around them. Otherwise we are reduced to following, to being monkeys. In that case, training may be the right word after all.

We're just warm bodies with a number (1)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077964)

Right now, we're just unable to train, because the guys weâ(TM)ve hired are out billing'â said David Marceau, vice president of Ridgefield One, a Connecticut staffing company that specializes in IT. Ridgefield employs three full-time IT professionals and has another half-dozen IT consultants out working. 'As long as they're out billing, I'll keep them out. If we ever get them back, I'll try to line up work as soon as possible,' he said.

I don't believe it, if only because actions speak louder than words. If they're not out billing, they're redundant.

If he really believed in the value of training in staying competitive. he'd be hiring more developers to give everyone a chance to stay current and his business competitive.

And for those who would rather learn on their own, at least some time to pursue pet projects or do some research that might pay off at a later date, or at least enhance people's skills ...

But no - it's "bid too low just to get the job, then work the coders insane hours and blame them if it goes pear-shaped."

Recommended training courses? (1)

molo (94384) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077966)

Has anyone had any good experiences with programming-centric training courses that they would recommend? Please, no introductory stuff.


Re:Recommended training courses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078446)

Has anyone had any good experiences with programming-centric training courses that they would recommend? Please, no introductory stuff.


I do not have anything to do with this company but CBT Nuggets are amazing and pretty reasonable

Re:Recommended training courses? (1)

Eskarel (565631) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078530)

Best value for money training I've ever had was brining in a consultant to work with me on a real project. Sort of like the old on the job training people used to do but with expertise from outside the company. Not the cheapest thing mind you, but not really much more expensive than outsourcing the project to a consulting firm. Doesn't get you a cert of course, but it does get you actual knowledge which is more valuable most of the time.

Of course how viable this is depends a lot on your current level of expertise, the more experienced you are the harder it is to make it work, but it does work well.

Other training courses I've been on tend to be more about little productivity gains. You've always done something in a certain way but on the course you see someone do it another way which is better and more effficient.

Read this the other day on LinkedIn: (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077968)

CFO says to CEO, "What if we spend all this money on training everyone, and they leave?"
CEO replies, "What if we don't spend the money and they stay?"

Re:Read this the other day on LinkedIn: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078178)

That was the Tao of Programming IIRC.

Consulting (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36077990)

This is one reason why I love working for big consulting companies. The more experience and skills you can put on your resume, the better - makes it easy to get approval for training. Plus, the big guys have relationships with major software vendors that yields free training.

That young fired up guy... and conferences (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078222)

Guys, go to conferences. Seriously.

I'm 23, I make over 100k, no college or diploma.

But I can destroy even the most senior developer at any of the large companies I've worked for. I went to a few conferences and someone picked me up, just like that. $10/hr to $30/hr+ in one job change.

You know what? The company that picked me up is running my code in production years and years later. Happily reaping the rewards of my first few months of employment when I rewrote their entire network monitoring system over Christmas break (had just started, no vacation).

Go to conferences and hire these young kids. Get over their short term (easy) problems. You have to defend them at work from the IT sharks but find a passionate one and remove the yellow tape. 1 year and the company will be begging to hire him..... That's my story. Did your company find such free flowing talent? You probably wanted someone who sat through something right? The passionate will gather for fun at these conferences.... they will be scared of your traditional interviews since you throw their resumes in the trash. Still worried about paper, most are....

(hint: poor people from sub 30K/yr income households have passion too, and without any financial backing for college they are *ripe* for the picking at these conferences. Even better is you get to hang out with these kids before they know it's an interview and you'll get a good judge of character.)

Re:That young fired up guy... and conferences (4, Insightful)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078330)

Aaaah, to be 23 again. Full of equal amounts of shit and confidence without the wisdom to know it.

Re:That young fired up guy... and conferences (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078362)

I'm 23, I make over 100k, no college or diploma.

Good for you. Sounds like you're pretty smart and motivated. There aren't many more like you. Typically, no college = idiot. For smart people, it's not hard to get a full ride scholarship, it has nothing to do with how much money their family has. Searching for more diamonds in the rough like you is stupid, because it's much easier to go for the low-hanging fruit: guys who are good enough, and far more plentiful. Plus they don't cost $100k a year...

demographics of labor shortage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078356)

Employees are a commodity, therefore expendable. This isn't going to change until there is a labor shortage, which will probably happen in the next decade. Demographics define the future. That's why things aren't really as bleak as they seem at this time.

One of Many Reasons I'm Staying Freelance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078422)

When I first started work and was in a job, I didn't just feel safe in my job. I would also get regular training - new skills, new techniques, all sorts of things.

In the past decade, I've worked in a load of companies as a freelancer, and only in 1 company have I seen people getting trained. The rest, they expect people to pick up books or manuals, maybe a CD-ROM course if you're lucky.

I really don't see any attraction to a job now. I don't see much difference apart from getting paid less. (-1, Offtopic)

irisvvv (2133468) | more than 3 years ago | (#36078438)

our website: [] watches price 75$ Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Hndbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35 Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30 Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $15 New era cap $10 Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25 FREE SHIPPING,accept paypal free shipping accept paypal credit card lower price fast shippment with higher quality BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!! SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!! FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!! **** [] ***

Tight and Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36078512)

Sounds like the women i gravitate too.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?