Recession's Mark on Millennials

[eytonxav]

I certainly feel the millennials do not have the same opportunities I had. One factor that has impacted millennials coming out of college is that it used to be quite common that corporations hired college grads and trained them on the job, but now it seems that most companies want experienced workers, no more OJT. Also, with outsourcing/globalization and green card workers, wages have deteriorated.

 

[harley]

I certainly feel the millennials do not have the same opportunities I had. One factor that has impacted millennials coming out of college is that it used to be quite common that corporations hired college grads and trained them on the job, but now it seems that most companies want experienced workers, no more OJT.

+1. I've often thought that is the biggest difficulty new employees face. This has been a problem for a number of years, not just the millennials. GenX'ers faced it for sure, and whoever was before them. I used to sit in on interviews for new hires thinking "there's no way I could have gotten a job in this environment if I wasn't already here". OTJ training was an excellent way to build an employee that could function in the particular company for a long time, but that isn't what companies want anymore. The want cogs.

 

[CaptTom]

... many employers can't be "loyal" to employees in same way they were when Boomers were 20-somethings. Lifetime employment and relatively generous benefits were far more common in the 70's than they are these days. Though necessary, the change in corporate culture led to much more job hopping.

I agree with all except the "necessary" part. It's pure greed and a twisted financial system that rewards a very few at the expense of many.

Case in point is the NH Demoula's dispute. To summarize, a successful supermarket chain was jointly inherited by two sides of the family, led by two individuals. One went to business school and learned all about current, cut-throat, kill-or-be-killed, screw-the-employee attitudes. The other ran the business, offering fair wages for employees, many of whom worked there for decades, and fair prices for customers, who were also extremely loyal.

Obviously there was a clash of cultures and the board tried to oust the "good guy" and make some changes to bring the chain in line with modern business practices. Spoiler alert: They lost in the end due to uprisings by customers, employees and even management.

By the way, the business was and continues to be wildly successful, making multi-millionaires out of everyone with ownership interest, with loyal customers and employees.

The greed that's baked into our system today, causing an alarming rate of income disparity, is obscene. Using "everyone is doing it" as justification for a total lack of loyalty to customers and employees is wrong.

It IS possible to treat your customers and employees fairly, and still get fabulously wealthy. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

 

[scrabbler1]

+1. My state univ tuition (alone) for one year out-of-state was $3,150 when I attended back in the 70's. Now it is $32,xxx. Just over a ten fold increase. For one year, for tuition only. In-state tuition for one year is $17,xxx.

I did a quick comparison of my college's tuition today versus when I last attended in 1984-85. On a per-credit basis, it went from $243 to $1,334, a rise by a factor of 5.5. If you take my 1985 starting salary and increase it by a factor of 5.5, it comes out to about what I'd be making today had I kept working full-time, with all the promotions and average and above-average pay raises I received in those 23 years (plus 9 more estimated average raises). The starting salary for today's worker at my old company would not be anywhere close to what a 32-year employee would make, but that hasn't stopped the college tuition from rising at that pace. And I am not including room and board, either, which has risen by a factor of between 6 and 7. Ouch!

 

[HadEnuff]

It may be harder for Millennials to do as well as Boomers, but not impossible.
They may have to work harder, and say "no" more often to discretionary expenses. Some of of those discretionary expenses we just had to live without because they did not exist, like 500 channels of cable TV, or optimum cell phone/data plans, to name two.
A used car with 20 or 30K on it instead of the new Nissan Sentra I bought, but realistically, that used car may well be a better car than my new Sentra was.

There are lots of ways to economize, and some will, and some won't, (just like my fellow Boomers)....and some will thrive, and some won't. Success was not guaranteed to my parents, nor to me. My parents and I had our share of sleepless nights worrying about how things might work out.

My Mother-in-Law told me she once complained to her parents (in the mid 1950s) how hard her life was, and her mom said, "yep. I remember being poor."...End of conversation.

 

[haha]

In a seminar on generational differences, they discussed the fact that the millenials (in general) are not ideal employees. They tend to be job hoppers, have poor work ethic, need lots of feedback on their job, not deal with conflict or criticism well (the trophy for showing up generation) and think that there is a job out there that they will love every aspect of. I have told more than one millenial that the job they are dreaming of is called a HOBBY. The reason an employer pays you to go to work is that its not always fun.

I suppose this may be true at lower skill levels, or at levels where drug use is common. But I believe that none of it is true at higher skill levels.

Developers and other high skill knowledge workers are very aware that intelligent, highly skilled local competition is only an H-1b visa away from their offices, and offshoring is always possible for the less business sensitive aspects of their work.

I have one son in millennial age bracket, and one son who manages many of this age. I have met many of them, and IMO they are a serious, well prepared, hard working and flexible group of people.

Ha

 

[razztazz]

It may be harder for Millennials to do as well as Boomers, but not impossible.
They may have to work harder, and say "no" more often to discretionary expenses. Some of of those discretionary expenses we just had to live without because they did not exist, like 500 channels of cable TV, or optimum cell phone/data plans, to name two.
A used car with 20 or 30K on it instead of the new Nissan Sentra I bought, but realistically, that used car may well be a better car than my new Sentra was.

There are lots of ways to economize, and some will, and some won't, (just like my fellow Boomers)....and some will thrive, and some won't. Success was not guaranteed to my parents, nor to me. My parents and I had our share of sleepless nights worrying about how things might work out.

My Mother-in-Law told me she once complained to her parents (in the mid 1950s) how hard her life was, and her mom said, "yep. I remember being poor."...End of conversation.

This is the very definition of Lack of Progress. As far as things they can do without today ..... Adam Smith calls them necessaries. IOW if it's what's expected in society then one ought not do without them and they are considered minimums not luxuries. But sure they can do without them Like only 3 meals a day instead only 2. Or one.

 

[Danmar]

I have one son in millennial age bracket, and one son who manages many of this age. I have met many of them, and IMO they are a serious, well prepared, hard working and flexible group of people.

Ha

Agree, my daughter is a millennial and she (and many of her friends) are at least as hard working as I was. I think they are more serious and perhaps more flexible(through necessity). I am confident in the future.

 

[Midpack]

... many employers can't be "loyal" to employees in same way they were when Boomers were 20-somethings. Lifetime employment and relatively generous benefits were far more common in the 70's than they are these days. Though necessary, the change in corporate culture led to much more job hopping.

I agree with all except the "necessary" part. It's pure greed and a twisted financial system that rewards a very few at the expense of many.

Case in point is the NH Demoula's dispute. To summarize, a successful supermarket chain was jointly inherited by two sides of the family, led by two individuals. One went to business school and learned all about current, cut-throat, kill-or-be-killed, screw-the-employee attitudes. The other ran the business, offering fair wages for employees, many of whom worked there for decades, and fair prices for customers, who were also extremely loyal.

Obviously there was a clash of cultures and the board tried to oust the "good guy" and make some changes to bring the chain in line with modern business practices. Spoiler alert: They lost in the end due to uprisings by customers, employees and even management.

By the way, the business was and continues to be wildly successful, making multi-millionaires out of everyone with ownership interest, with loyal customers and employees.

The greed that's baked into our system today, causing an alarming rate of income disparity, is obscene. Using "everyone is doing it" as justification for a total lack of loyalty to customers and employees is wrong.

It IS possible to treat your customers and employees fairly, and still get fabulously wealthy. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

While there are certainly examples of companies who've exhibited "pure greed and a twisted financial system" over the past 40 years, that's a sweeping generalization - largely unfair. Globalization has forced employers and employees to compete with companies all around the globe like it was never the case when I was 20-something. If it was "pure greed," why have thousands of companies gone under and millions lost their jobs? I worked for a company that often bent over backwards to make decisions favoring employees from the factory floor on up. But over my career, global competitors and consumers looking for the lowest possible prices (it's only natural) forced us to cut costs & improve productivity radically. Wages in Mexico were literally 10 cents on the dollar compared to my US employees - how's responding to that pure greed on our part?

 

[MRG]

I remember graduating high school and getting married in 1975, best decision I've ever made. DW made 20 cents over minimum wage, my pay was less and infrequent. We didn't have a phone or AC anywhere. Three years later we moved 1200 miles away from home so I could get better pay($5.60 hr).

We both ate liver wurst sandwiches for lunch as it was the cheapest source of nourishment we could buy. Living in KC with one vehicle without AC. Then there were those wonderful early 80s. Going to night school and working full time. Paying off school loans while still not seeing the benefits of increasing wages.

Yeah we've had it so much better.

 

[Just_Steve]

Liver Wurst Mmmm.
On my top 5 list for sami.

 

[jollystomper]

My experience comparing my life with my millennial children: In one sense, I had it easier. When I graduated in 1979 my my Ivy League college charged $6,000, my Megacorp starting salary was around $16K, my apartment rent (kitchen, dining area, living one, bedroom, full bath, walk-in closet) was $325, and my total loans were $1000. If these numbers kept pace with inflation, modern cost equivalents (using the CPI numbers) would be $19,835 for that Ivy League education, $54,900 for that starting salary, $1074 for rent, and $3300 in loans. Obviously the relative costs have far outpaced the relative earnings.

I also agree that globalization has greatly reduced many entry jobs, or reduced their wages. When Megacorp can eliminate a good paying job for the salary equivalent of 4 overseas jobs... that is something I did not have to deal with starting out. Indeed, in those days many companies paid you a premium to work overseas, rather than hire someone local to that country.

However - and I could be wrong - it also seemed that people my age were much more willing to major in and study subjects based on the "employability" of the subjects, versus subjects that they just liked or were easy. For example, i got into radio and communications in college was was tempted to go into that for a career ( I even had a radio station contact me after hearing my aircheck wanting to interview me). But I did not see that as a long term affordable career option, as compared to these "newfangled" areas like computers and data processing (as it was called back then), so that is where I focused my studies.

Lots of my friends went into engineering, medical, law, and business related professions not necessarily out of immediate love of the career, but because they knew there was demand for those skills and they could find a job after completing their studies. There were also a lot fewer things you could major in - there seemed to be a closer connection with school providing majors that were more widely employable than there is today. NO ONE wanted to go back and live at home, no matter how nice it was... there was a feeling that you were not an adult if you still had to live at home.

When my kids were applying to college, in almost all of the visits there was a huge emphasis on the "college experiences" versus "what you do here will dictate your opportunities after graduation". At the college DW taught at, when she tried to tell her department heads (History) about emphasizing the skills History majors could use to leverage into good jobs, she was dismissed with the line "we don't want to send them into 'drone' jobs". It just some (not all) that have fallen for the "I can study what I want, and if I can't find a good job then it is society's fault" attitude.

Jut my observation. One is easily biased within one's own generation, and easy to look down on subsequent ones... I am fortunate to have (beyond my kids) other millennials that I am friends with so I can observe up close and personal what they deal with instead of just reports - we have some interesting and wonderful discussions, even when we do not agree.

 

[Amethyst]

Day after day, year after year, I ate PBJ sandwiches for work. I still eat PBJ sandwiches for work (2 days a week now). It wasn't a sacrifice. I really like peanut butter

I did move 1,000 miles all by myself for a job, and that was hard and scary. I had no furniture for about a year until a neighbor in the next apartment moved away and left me hers, but ya gotta do what ya gotta do. I slept on a mattress on the floor, where I could keep an eye on the cockroaches. Later, I got roommates. A whole succession of them.

Suspect the 4 Horses of the Apocalypse are on their way...or is it the 4 Yorkshiremen?

 

[razztazz]

While there are certainly examples of companies who've exhibited "pure greed and a twisted financial system" over the past 40 years, that's a sweeping generalization - largely unfair.

No. It is fair to those to whom it applies. There's always more to the story and much for people (business types)to hide behind so they can claim it is unfair.

Globalization has forced employers and employees to compete with companies all around the globe

Nobody forced nothin'. Globalization was planned by business. It did not get slapped on innocent businesses by evil big government like a regulation or something. If it was, businesses would have been against it.

If it was "pure greed," why have thousands of companies gone under and millions lost their jobs?

Because it only matters that a small handful of greedy interests gain from it. The many many thousands of other businesses that were victimized were of no matter to the globalists who profited.

There is no chivalry in these matters and no marketplace is really free

 

[HadEnuff]

This is the very definition of Lack of Progress. As far as things they can do without today ..... Adam Smith calls them necessaries. IOW if it's what's expected in society then one ought not do without them and they are considered minimums not luxuries. But sure they can do without them Like only 3 meals a day instead only 2. Or one.

Well, if lack of progress means not being able to buy as many toys as your parents, well...as my old man might have said, "if that's all you have to complain about, you are doing pretty well".
I would not equate doing without 500 Cable TV Channels, and an iPhone, with missing a meal.
After WWII, the USA was blessed with an intact infrastructure, and a ramped up industrial capacity. In the 50s and 60s my family lived in Europe, as my dad was working internationally. While there, his income provided us with a standard of living (Big House, Servants, Nannys, and eating at fancy restaurants constantly), that we could not afford back in the USA. Dad's $750 month got spread pretty thin back in Cincinnati.
In many ways, what we see before us is just a bit of evening out of the prosperity of western industrial culture.
To think every generation is going to have more than the last, with less effort makes no more sense than thinking the US Stock Market will always go up.

 

[NW-Bound]

I don't know any millennials, other than my own children and their cousins.

They had an easier time growing up than we did, but it was not their fault. We and our siblings are financially better than our parents.

Now that they are working, I still see them often. Not too much different than when we were at their age, other than none but one of them had any desire to have children. We stay neutral here, because having an unwanted and unloved child would be a disaster.

When we were at their age now, we had to support our parents. Instead, our offsprings are getting gifts from us and a good inheritance in the future, barring some global calamities. Not all millennials are in this situation, hence I cannot make broad comments about any generation.

 

[Texas Proud]

I just want to point out that a good number of millenials have done very well...

Mark Zuckerberg is worth $53 billion...

And most people that work in his company are millenials... and are doing very well...

The ability to get very rich is much better today than when I was young...


There is opportunity out there is you want to go and get it...

 

[Danmar]

Not all millennials are in this situation, hence I cannot make broad comments about any generation.

This is the right response. We try to extrapolate our very limited personal experiences across a whole generation. Hardly makes sense. I think there is pretty good evidence that education costs are generally higher and starting salaries generally lower. Other than the few who work for Silicon Valley of course. But there are so many other personal factors that come into play.

In any event, I am just happy that I can help the next generation financially. This was not the case with my parents.

 

[CRLLS]

I looked up my private school's tuition and room/board. In 1970 it was about $500 each per semester. This year tuition is $16,000 and R&B is $5,000 per semester. So lodging increased 10x while tuition went up 32X.

I think that, in some respects, we get what we ask for. We wanted retirement plans that easily transferred from employer to employer. We got IRA's and 401K's. With those portable plans, there is no long term incentive for a employee to be loyal at a single employer. The old defined-benefit plans had higher benefits to the longer employees making a big incentive to stay. Now, their best financial path is to change employers every so often. Nor is it advantageous for an employer to keep employees. There are many qualified candidates looking due to the previously stated retirement plans. The mobile workforce knife works both ways. Sad, but true.

There are other forces at work too. But these are not insignificant ones IMO.

 

[MRG]

Liver Wurst Mmmm.
On my top 5 list for sami.

Six days a week? Yum.

 

[NW-Bound]

Love liverwurst. Also head cheese (see photo linked from Wikipedia). I could buy the latter 30-40 years ago in grocery stores, but it is now impossible to get.

Not too many millennials know to eat good stuff like this, recession or not. In Europe, maybe.

Note to self: look for head cheese in the upcoming European trip. Head cheese on bread, pickled onion and cornichon on the side. My mouth is watering.

PS. What is even better? Liverwurst AND head cheese on the same sandwich! How can life get better than that? It could, I guess, but not a whole lot more.

 

[HadEnuff]

Of course, life was easier for us. When I was in college a box of Kraft Mac & Cheese was 19 cents. I ate a lot of it then, so I wouldn't ever have to eat it again.
That and Hamburger Helper. I remember one night putting my fork down mid-plate and realizing that if I ever ate one more bite of Hamburger Helper, I'd just throw up on the spot

 

[dtbach]

When my kids were applying to college, in almost all of the visits there was a huge emphasis on the "college experiences" versus "what you do here will dictate your opportunities after graduation".

My exact experience! Even pushing the "study abroad" for a year program as a "must do". Heck, no way I'm paying for my kid to have a vacation overseas. She wants to be a Physical Therapist so what does she need a semester in Spain or France for?

 

[Texas Proud]

I looked up my private school's tuition and room/board. In 1970 it was about $500 each per semester. This year tuition is $16,000 and R&B is $5,000 per semester. So lodging increased 10x while tuition went up 32X.

I think that, in some respects, we get what we ask for. We wanted retirement plans that easily transferred from employer to employer. We got IRA's and 401K's. With those portable plans, there is no long term incentive for a employee to be loyal at a single employer. The old defined-benefit plans had higher benefits to the longer employees making a big incentive to stay. Now, their best financial path is to change employers every so often. Nor is it advantageous for an employer to keep employees. There are many qualified candidates looking due to the previously stated retirement plans. The mobile workforce knife works both ways. Sad, but true.

There are other forces at work too. But these are not insignificant ones IMO.

Not quite true on your stmt I highlighted....

Most companies do not start to match until you are there a year... and you have to be there 5 years to fully vest... maybe 7 if they spread it out...

Now, if you are moving to get a better position and salary, then this might not be an issue... but moving should have something else attached to it...

 

[mrfeh]

This is the right response. We try to extrapolate our very limited personal experiences across a whole generation. Hardly makes sense.

+1

There are a lot of anecdotes in this thread.