5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _EAllusion »

For what it is worth, this struck me as a very solid paper:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 8/full#b13

This section seems relevant here:

The workplace is one sphere where overweight people may be vulnerable to discriminatory attitudes and fat bias. A number of studies have investigated weight-based discrimination in employment. The results point to prejudice, insensitivity, and inequity in work settings.

Experimental studies addressing stereotypic attitudes in employers suggest that overweight people may be at a substantial disadvantage even before the interview process begins. Experimental studies have investigated hiring decisions by manipulating perceptions of employee weight, either through written description or photograph. Participants (most often college students) are randomly assigned to a condition in which a fictional job applicant is described or pictured as overweight or average weight (but with identical résumés) and are asked to evaluate the applicant's qualifications.

An example is a study using written descriptions of hypothetical managers (12). Managers described as average weight were rated as significantly more desirable supervisors, and overweight managers were judged more harshly for undesirable behaviors (such as taking credit) than were average weight managers. Similarly, in a study by Klassen et al. (13), women students (N = 216) read employee summaries of nine fictitious women employees, varying in weight and in stereotypical descriptions associated with obesity and thinness. Participants indicated the most desire to work with thin targets and the least desire to work with obese targets, although participants did not rely on stereotypical perceptions of weight in recommending harsh discipline to employees.

A study of job applicants for sales and business positions reported that written descriptions of target applicants resulted in significantly more negative judgments for obese women than for non-obese women (14). Participants (N = 104) rated obese applicants as lacking self-discipline, having low supervisory potential, and having poor personal hygiene and professional appearance. In general, participants held these negative stereotypes for obese applicants for sales positions but not for business positions. Interestingly, the study's findings were not mirrored when photographs were used instead of written descriptions of weight. The authors proposed several confounding factors to explain this outcome, such as differing applicant information accompanying the photographs, and concluded that obese applicants remain vulnerable to negative evaluations because of their weight (14).

Several studies have manipulated applicant weight with videotapes. This was done over two decades ago by Larkin and Pines (15) in which participants (N = 120) viewed a video of a job applicant in a simulated hiring setting. The scenario involved an applicant completing written screening tests for work requiring logical analysis and eye-hand coordination. Overweight applicants were significantly less likely to be recommended for hiring than average-weight applicants, and overweight applicants were judged as significantly less neat, productive, ambitious, disciplined, and determined (15). Another study using a simulated hiring interview for a receptionist position found that the obese applicant was less likely to be hired than the non-obese applicant (16). This study was able to rule out the extraneous factor of facial attractiveness by masking the faces of both applicants.

A more recent and impressive study used videotaped mock interviews with the same professional actors acting as job applicants for computer and sales positions in which weight was manipulated with theatrical prostheses (17). Subjects (N = 320) indicated that employment bias was much greater for obese candidates than for average-weight applicants; the bias was more apparent for women than for men. There was also a significant effect reported for job type; obese applicants were more likely to be recommended for a systems analyst position than for a sales position (17).

Other evidence also demonstrates employer perceptions of obese persons as unfit in public sales positions and more appropriate for telephone sales involving little face-to-face contact (18) (19). Jasper and Klassen (20) instructed participants (N = 135) to evaluate a hypothetical salesperson's résumé that included a written manipulation of the employee's weight. Obesity led to more negative impressions of the applicant and made the applicant significantly less desirable to work with. Participants who viewed the obese applicant description said directly that the obesity led to their judgments.

Excess weight may be especially disadvantageous in some settings. In a recent study of hiring preferences of overweight physical educators, most hiring personnel sampled (N = 85) reported that being 10 to 20 pounds overweight would handicap an applicant, regardless of qualifications (21). The authors concluded, “our hope is that these findings may serve to motivate some of these individuals to improve their health behaviors and in turn become better professional role models” (21).

Inequity in Wages, Promotions, and Employment Termination
A comprehensive literature review by Roehling (22) summarizes numerous work-related stereotypes reported in over a dozen laboratory studies. Overweight employees are assumed to lack self-discipline, be lazy, less conscientious, less competent, sloppy, disagreeable, and emotionally unstable. Obese employees are also believed to think slower, have poorer attendance records, and be poor role models (23). These stereotypes could affect wages, promotion, and termination.

There is evidence of a significant wage penalty for obese employees. This takes several forms: lower wages of obese employers for the same job performed by non-obese counterparts, fewer obese employees being hired in high-level positions, and denial of promotions to obese employees. A study of over 2000 women and men (18 years of age and older) reported that obesity lowered wage growth rates by nearly 6% in 1982 to 1985 (24).

Although both obese men and women face wage-related obstacles, they experience discrimination in different ways. An analysis from the National Longitudinal Survey Youth Cohort examined earnings in over 8000 men and women 18 to 25 years old and reported that obese women earned 12% less than non-obese women (25). Like studies to follow, this investigation indicated that the economic penalty of obesity seems to be specific to women. More recently, research based on earnings of 7000 men and women from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth indicated that women face a significant wage penalty for obesity and that obese women are much more likely than thin women to hold low-paying jobs (26). Another longitudinal study following young adults over 8 years found that overweight women earned over $6000 less than non-obese women (26). Gortmaker et al. (27) and Stunkard and Sorensen (4) attribute lower wages to social bias and discrimination. Obese men do not face a similar wage penalty but are under-represented and paid less than non-obese men in managerial and professional occupations and are over-represented in transportation occupations, suggesting that obese men engage in occupational sorting to counteract a wage penalty (26).

Experimental research indicates that obese employees are rated to have lower promotion prospects than average weight counterparts (28). A recent study instructed supervisors and managers (N = 168) to evaluate the promotion potential of a hypothetical employee in a manufacturing company with one of eight disabilities or health problems, including obesity, poor vision, depression, colon cancer, diabetes, arm amputation, facial burns, or no disability (29). The obese candidate received lower promotion recommendations (despite identical qualifications) than a nondisabled peer and was rated to be less accepted by subordinates than the other promotion candidates..


Short version: Being obese is a significant professional disadvantage. Moreso for women.
_Analytics
_Emeritus
Posts: 4231
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Analytics »

Lemmie wrote:No problem, I'll hold my ground on this one as well, it seems at least you are willing to address the issue. However, if you're calling demand an arbitrary handle and thinking ldsfaqs has a decent understanding of the underlying concept, then I'll have to cut you a little slack as that econ class you took maybe needs a refresher!! Not a favorite topic among non-econ majors, I know....

The discussion here was of the ongoing advertisement of unfilled positions and/or contracts, which is an indicator of excess demand; the statement of many jobs not implying enough jobs is meaningless in this context. The relevant comparison is the match up of supply and demand, not just stating job number totals....


At the current market prices, isn't the total number of jobs offered and the total number of jobs desired the specific measurements of demand and supply, on the Q axis? "Not enough jobs" is the number of jobs between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, at the current market price. That's what I meant.

Anyway, it seems to me that economic models are just that—models. They can offer a lot of insight into reality—but they can also obfuscate, mislead, and close your mind. It reminds me of a story that Reid Derchi told at USU back in the day—he said one of his Ph.D. candidates was taking his very last oral examination, and was presented with an economic problem where some specific data didn’t fit the model, and was asked to explain it. The guy said, “well, the data must be wrong.” Dirchi got furious over that, and said that if he could, he would have flunked the guy out of school for that. Models are meant to explain and predict data. They aren’t the underlying truth of anything. His exact words were “the data is all there is!”

So if we’re judging faqs on how well he is regurgitating the models he would have learned in college, then sure—flunk him. But if we are having a discussion about what’s going on in the real world, I’m willing to listen to fresh ideas and try to extract what’s insightful.

Just to add some data to this, a couple of years ago I hired an electrician named Jason to wire a remodeled room in my basement. I got him on Angie’s List. He was perhaps 30 years old, and only charged me $75 an hour, which I thought was a steal. He was extremely busy. He brought a couple of guys with him, and they were awful. They were lazy, had bad attitudes, and didn’t really know what they were doing. As a customer, I didn’t feel comfortable with them in my house.

Jason apologized for the performance of his crew, and talked about how hard it was to find good people. I’m not sure if he fired those guys, but he was definitely looking for better people and only using those guys as a last resort.

So from my perspective and Jason’s perspective, there is a shortage of qualified electricians. But from the perspective of the crew, there weren’t very many jobs.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

-Yuval Noah Harari
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Lemmie »

Analytics wrote:At the current market prices, isn't the total number of jobs offered and the total number of jobs desired the specific measurements of demand and supply, on the Q axis? "Not enough jobs" is the number of jobs between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, and the current market price. That's what I meant.


I'm assuming when you say "not enough jobs" in the context of this model, you are describing a market out of equilibrium, where at the current wage, quantity supplied exceeds quantity demanded, for an excess supply of labor.

What are you basing this conclusion on? Are wages in this market falling? is the unemployment rate for qualified electricians, plumbers, whatever significantly higher than the natural rate of employment in this sector?

On the other hand, using the same model, suppose at a given price, quantity demanded exceeded quantity supplied, for an excess demand for labor. What would this look like? would there be many advertisements for people looking for work? would these ads stay up for a lengthy period of time? would there be a continuous and increasing rate of addition of new ads? would the wages for this particular market be driven up? would the rate of unemployment for qualified workers be at or below the natural rate of unemployment for this sector? Almost all of these are situations discussed and described in this thread, except for ldsfaqs' uninformed highly anecdotal evidence, which I suspect is actually a description of lack of qualifications.

So yes, you are using the correct model, but exactly like your anecdote, you also need to use the data. By the way, I would have not accepted that student's dissertation if he really said that and stuck by his opinion. One irresponsible student does not invalidate the use of economic modeling.

Your personal story about hiring Jason is an interesting representation of externalities negatively influencing an exchange on the microeconomic level. Discussion of labor markets is an evaluation of macroeconomic behavior. There is no way to come to an accurate macroeconomic conclusion on the basis of an extremely small number of anecdotal pieces of microeconomic evidence.

In addition, if it is happening to a significant extent, your anecdote actually describes a micro behavior supporting excess demand for labor. Consider that you apparently paid a price below the market price ('a steal') which means Jason would probably have passed on a lower wage to his workers, which means in a market with excess demand for labor, of course he wouldn't be able to hire anyone qualified. Why would such a worker take a lower wage from Jason when there were plenty of higher paying jobs available?
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _EAllusion »

The guy said, “well, the data must be wrong.” Dirchi got furious over that, and said that if he could, he would have flunked the guy out of school for that. Models are meant to explain and predict data. They aren’t the underlying truth of anything. His exact words were “the data is all there is!”


I'm wary of this anecdote. In a sense, the data never can be wrong, because the data just is. But there are such things as measurement errors - mistakes in the acquisition of data or interpreting what it means. Sometimes the data suggesting a model is wrong is itself really good evidence something has gone wrong in measurement. It depends in how much confidence we have in our model. Is it more reasonable to think the model is off or that something went wrong in data collection? The answer to this isn't always obvious. I'm sure you can think of all sorts of examples where breathtaking findings are released that suggest current models are wrong, only later to find out that there was an error in the findings - experimental mistake, fraud, etc. Physics is famous for these.

I'd be pissed if saying "the data must be wrong" is an auto-fail in a scientific arena. if I'm a 9th grade physics teacher having my students run pendulum experiments and I notice that one group of students are reporting numbers that disprove Newtonia mechanics, is it unreasonable for me to conclude that the data is wrong? Of course not. There's an error in data collection there somewhere.
_Analytics
_Emeritus
Posts: 4231
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Analytics »

Lemmie wrote:I'm assuming when you say "not enough jobs" in the context of this model, you are describing a market out of equilibrium, where at the current wage, quantity supplied exceeds quantity demanded, for an excess supply of labor.

What are you basing this conclusion on? Are wages in this market falling? is the unemployment rate for qualified electricians, plumbers, whatever significantly higher than the natural rate of employment in this sector?


Let's take a step back. The OP said there were lots of jobs available for electricians. Faqs said he wasn't sure because that claim isn't consistent with the experience of "several" friends in 3 states.

Canpakes replied that he quickly found listings for several dozen jobs. Faqs replied that that doesn't necessarily prove anything.

All I'm trying to do is map Faqs's skepticism onto the supply/demand model. Several dozen jobs being unfilled (plus all of the jobs that are filled) gives us a decent count of the demand for electricians. However, it gives us very little information about the supply of electricians. What is the supply? Are there 8 people competing for 80 jobs, or are there 4,000 people competing for 80 jobs?

Faqs is claiming that with the evidence presented here, we don't know whether there is an oversupply or an undersupply of electricians. I tend to agree. That's all I'm saying with regards to what he's said on the matter.

Personally, I would guess that there is an undersupply of good electricians--good meaning technically competent, reliable, no criminal history, passing drug tests, and with an overall presentable image that employers are comfortable sending out into the world to be the face of their businesses. But there is probably an oversupply of less-perfect electricians. I would guess that many employers hold out for the "right" guys. That's why good people are busy and charge high rates, while there are lots of people who want these jobs but can't get them. The unemployed people are unemployed because they can't compete on price--As somebody who occasionally purchases electrician services, I'd rather pay a busy pro $100 an hour and be confident he was doing it right than pay an underemployed guy $20 an hour who may or may not know what he's doing.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

-Yuval Noah Harari
_Analytics
_Emeritus
Posts: 4231
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Analytics »

I'll add a personal anecdote that illustrates the point.

In 1994, I was pursuing a Ph.D. in Economics at Michigan State University. I happened to read an article in the Wall Street Journal that year about the supply and demand for Econ professors--the article claimed that there were a ton of people like me that were staying in school forever, while colleges were cutting back and 2 out of 3 times, were replacing the teaching loads of retiring tenured professors with adjunct professors and graduate assistants.

It told the story of Colgate University putting out a small ad for a tenured-track assistant professor job. That indicates a demand for economists, right? The article went on to say Colgate got 600 resumes in the mail.

Jobs being advertised doesn't mean the demand for employees meets the supply.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

-Yuval Noah Harari
_just me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9070
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _just me »

Analytics wrote:
Personally, I would guess that there is an undersupply of good electricians--good meaning technically competent, reliable, no criminal history, passing drug tests, and with an overall presentable image that employers are comfortable sending out into the world to be the face of their businesses. But there is probably an oversupply of less-perfect electricians. I would guess that many employers hold out for the "right" guys. That's why good people are busy and charge high rates, while there are lots of people who want these jobs but can't get them. The unemployed people are unemployed because they can't compete on price--As somebody who occasionally purchases electrician services, I'd rather pay a busy pro $100 an hour and be confident he was doing it right than pay an underemployed guy $20 an hour who may or may not know what he's doing.


Absolutely. And this is what Mike Rowe is basically saying. There are not enough SKILLED laborers to fill the demand.

What he is saying is that rather than tell all the unskilled people that they need to go to college to get a "good" job we should be telling people about the option of learning a trade. There are many good jobs available in the trades for skilled workers.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _canpakes »

just me wrote:
ldsfaqs wrote:
I've held over 30 jobs in my life.... and many more interviews applications etc.


Actually, this means you haven't been able to hold a job. If you started working at age 16 and are now around 46 that is more than 1 job per year! Not sure if you started working at 16 or if you worked during college or how long you were in the Marines, but this is a terrible work history.

What is the longest you've spent at one job? What is the shortest?

It's worse than that. He has been nearly or completely unemployed by others over the last 5 years, and prior he was trying to generate income through Internet schemes. And he has said elsewhere that the number of past jobs is 35.

I'd be interested to see this claimed list of employment. At the least it would seem to point to an issue about himself that he needs to correct, unless he just happened to work for 35 difficult employers that were so unbearable as to force him to abandon jobs every 6 - 9 months. That's a difficult premise to consider.
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Lemmie »

Analytics wrote:
Lemmie wrote:I'm assuming when you say "not enough jobs" in the context of this model, you are describing a market out of equilibrium, where at the current wage, quantity supplied exceeds quantity demanded, for an excess supply of labor.

What are you basing this conclusion on? Are wages in this market falling? is the unemployment rate for qualified electricians, plumbers, whatever significantly higher than the natural rate of employment in this sector?


Let's take a step back. The OP said there were lots of jobs available for electricians. Faqs said he wasn't sure because that claim isn't consistent with the experience of "several" friends in 3 states.

Canpakes replied that he quickly found listings for several dozen jobs. Faqs replied that that doesn't necessarily prove anything.

All I'm trying to do is map Faqs's skepticism onto the supply/demand model. Several dozen jobs being unfilled (plus all of the jobs that are filled) gives us a decent count of the demand for electricians. However, it gives us very little information about the supply of electricians. What is the supply? Are there 8 people competing for 80 jobs, or are there 4,000 people competing for 80 jobs?

Faqs is claiming that with the evidence presented here, we don't know whether there is an oversupply or an undersupply of electricians. I tend to agree. That's all I'm saying with regards to what he's said on the matter.

Personally, I would guess that there is an undersupply of good electricians--good meaning technically competent, reliable, no criminal history, passing drug tests, and with an overall presentable image that employers are comfortable sending out into the world to be the face of their businesses. But there is probably an oversupply of less-perfect electricians. I would guess that many employers hold out for the "right" guys. That's why good people are busy and charge high rates, while there are lots of people who want these jobs but can't get them. The unemployed people are unemployed because they can't compete on price--As somebody who occasionally purchases electrician services, I'd rather pay a busy pro $100 an hour and be confident he was doing it right than pay an underemployed guy $20 an hour who may or may not know what he's doing.

No. Jobs continuing to go unfilled is not the demand for labor, it is excess demand for labor, which is an excess of demand over supply. Remember that demand for labor is all jobs filled and unfilled. An excess demand for labor most definitely gives information about relative demand and supply.

I did explain what evidence you might see in the face of excess supply vs. excess demand. If you feel you can't determine anything about supply it's certainly your right to have that opinion.

Personally, I myself am not comfortable with making an opinion on the basis of personal anecdotes, and individual guesses.

Your last comment fully supports my assessment in the last email, so though you are determined to not use economic modeling, I suspect we are more in agreement than you think.

Edited to add: you have a doctorate in Economics?? Are you trolling me? or do you really, really, really not like your field of study? :cool: You can say so, no offense taken. Economics definitely stirs strong and opposite emotions to a significant extent.
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: 5.6 Million Jobs Available in US

Post by _Lemmie »

Analytics wrote:I'll add a personal anecdote that illustrates the point.

In 1994, I was pursuing a Ph.D. in Economics at Michigan State University. I happened to read an article in the Wall Street Journal that year about the supply and demand for Econ professors--the article claimed that there were a ton of people like me that were staying in school forever, while colleges were cutting back and 2 out of 3 times, were replacing the teaching loads of retiring tenured professors with adjunct professors and graduate assistants.

It told the story of Colgate University putting out a small ad for a tenured-track assistant professor job. That indicates a demand for economists, right? The article went on to say Colgate got 600 resumes in the mail.

Jobs being advertised doesn't mean the demand for employees meets the supply.


You are discussing apples and oranges. How did you get only demand meets supply out of a consideration of excess demand for labor?

Re: your anecdote, read my description of how job ads could be used to give information.

Your static (one-shot, single time frame) analysis of job advertisements is in no way equivalent to the dynamic analysis of job ads I was considering. Not to mention its static analysis of one single job ad event, not really the sample size you need.

Dynamic analysis evaluates a variable over time; I suggested looking at average length of time for ad fulfillment, noting length of time for withdrawal of unfulfilled ads, the rate of change of total ads over time.

Do you practice economics? Are you trolling me?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Feb 17, 2016 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply