Workers are hard to find in the West

[uscitizen]

Workers are hard to find in the West
BUSINESS OWNERS STUMPED BY LOW UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
By Matt Gouras
ASSOCIATED PRESS

HELENA, Mont. --
The owner of a fast-food joint in Montana's booming oil patch found himself outsourcing the drive-through window to a Texas telemarketing firm, not because it's cheaper but because he can't find workers.

Record low unemployment across parts of the West has created tough working conditions for business owners, who in places are being forced to boost wages or be creative to fill their jobs.

John Francis, who owns the McDonald's in Sidney, Mont., said he tried advertising in the local newspaper and even offered up to $10 an hour to compete with higher-paying oil field jobs. Yet the only calls were from other business owners upset they would have to raise wages, too. Of course, Francis' current employees also wanted a raise.

"I don't know what the answer is," Francis said. "There's just nobody around that wants to work."

(for the money he wants to pay Didn't even want to pay his existing employees what he offered the new ones ? Law of supply and demand works for employees too )

http://www.lexingtonheraldleader.com/101/story/159233.html

I guess to many people out there have degrees ?

 

[Topspin]

they prob do,
if he offerred $20 he'd have people lining up.
We get thousands of resume's for every finance job we list.

 

[Battleborne]

Which are useless...........

Workers are hard to find in the West
BUSINESS OWNERS STUMPED BY LOW UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
By Matt Gouras
ASSOCIATED PRESS

HELENA, Mont. --
The owner of a fast-food joint in Montana's booming oil patch found himself outsourcing the drive-through window to a Texas telemarketing firm, not because it's cheaper but because he can't find workers.

Record low unemployment across parts of the West has created tough working conditions for business owners, who in places are being forced to boost wages or be creative to fill their jobs.

John Francis, who owns the McDonald's in Sidney, Mont., said he tried advertising in the local newspaper and even offered up to $10 an hour to compete with higher-paying oil field jobs. Yet the only calls were from other business owners upset they would have to raise wages, too. Of course, Francis' current employees also wanted a raise.

"I don't know what the answer is," Francis said. "There's just nobody around that wants to work."

(for the money he wants to pay Didn't even want to pay his existing employees what he offered the new ones ? Law of supply and demand works for employees too )

http://www.lexingtonheraldleader.com/101/story/159233.html

I guess to many people out there have degrees ?

Today...Business insources high paying tech jobs at a extremely lower rate...while also insourcing low paying service jobs ie: from el Mexico! Heck even College educated people must compete with Illegal Aliens for low tech jobs...a sorry state of affairs!

 

[uscitizen]

I jut thought the article was a bit humerous that he apparently did not want to pay his existing employees as much as offering the new ones and then said no one wants to work.

 

[Damocles]

Wow, wasn't it just a year ago we were still hearing about the abysmal employment rates from the left? It seems that some of what we were saying was correct after all. How is that line?

Oh yes! "I hate being right all the time."

 

[uscitizen]

Wow, wasn't it just a year ago we were still hearing about the abysmal employment rates from the left? It seems that some of what we were saying was correct after all. How is that line?

Oh yes! "I hate being right all the time."

Yep the oil fields of Montana are the entire country


Umm just because the national average is 4.6 or somesuch does not mean it is evenly spread out. Kys average is something like 5.6 but some counties go 15%

 

[Damocles]

Yep the oil fields of Montana are the entire country


Umm just because the national average is 4.6 or somesuch does not mean it is evenly spread out. Kys average is something like 5.6 but some counties go 15%

We pretty much have full employment, and it seems to rankle you some. I have noticed an extreme drop off on such topics lately though, most of you guys seem to realize that it isn't flying.

 

[uscitizen]

We pretty much have full employment, and it seems to rankle you some. I have noticed an extreme drop off on such topics lately though, most of you guys seem to realize that it isn't flying.

full employment if 15% ?
Just another con myth.
Well then why are wages still pretty stagnant ?

 

[Damocles]

full employment if 15% ?
Just another con myth.
Well then why are wages still pretty stagnant ?

I don't know, but 15%? Do you have to dig to find a place with that?

Link us up to a 15% unemployment rate.

I remember during Clinton's terms how the unemployment rates that are currently happening were considered "full employment".

Anyway, wages aren't very stagnant as they have risen every year since 2002, after the recovery. I think you are mixing up the fact that the current wages are about the same, after adjusting from inflation, as they were in 2000 just before the recession began and saying that they are therefore "stagnant". That is a poor interpretation of the data.

 

[uscitizen]

Umm they have dropped a bit in ky but if you read the note at the end you will see why...
"Magoffin County recorded the state's highest unemployment rate - 10.3 percent. It was followed by McCreary County, 10.1 percent; Clay County, 10 percent; Jackson County, 9.7 percent; Todd and Wolfe counties, 9.6 percent each; Muhlenberg County, 9.2 percent; Leslie and Morgan counties, 8.8 percent each; and Owsley County, 8.5 percent.

Contact: Kim Saylor Brannock
KimS.Brannock@mail.state.ky.us
(502) 564-6606

NOTE: Unemployment statistics are based on estimates and are compiled to measure trends rather than actually to count people working. Civilian labor force statistics include non-military workers and unemployed Kentuckians who are actively seeking work. They do not include unemployed Kentuckians who have not looked for employment within the past four weeks. The statistics in this news release are not seasonally adjusted to allow for comparisons between United States, state and counties figures."

http://www.workforcekentucky.ky.gov/article.asp?PAGEID=4&SUBID=&articleID=437

If someone is not looking thru the unemployment office in the last 4 weeks they are dropped form the tally ie are counted as employed. once unemployment benefits run out who goes back to the unemplyoyment office ?

Have you ever used the unemployment office to find a job ?

 

[uscitizen]

I don't know, but 15%? Do you have to dig to find a place with that?

Link us up to a 15% unemployment rate.

I remember during Clinton's terms how the unemployment rates that are currently happening were considered "full employment".

Anyway, wages aren't very stagnant as they have risen every year since 2002, after the recovery. I think you are mixing up the fact that the current wages are about the same, after adjusting from inflation, as they were in 2000 just before the recession began and saying that they are therefore "stagnant". That is a poor interpretation of the data.

I don't not care if God says it the full employment spins is crapola.

 

[Damocles]

Umm they have dropped a bit in ky but if you read the note at the end you will see why...
"Magoffin County recorded the state's highest unemployment rate - 10.3 percent. It was followed by McCreary County, 10.1 percent; Clay County, 10 percent; Jackson County, 9.7 percent; Todd and Wolfe counties, 9.6 percent each; Muhlenberg County, 9.2 percent; Leslie and Morgan counties, 8.8 percent each; and Owsley County, 8.5 percent.

Contact: Kim Saylor Brannock
KimS.Brannock@mail.state.ky.us
(502) 564-6606

NOTE: Unemployment statistics are based on estimates and are compiled to measure trends rather than actually to count people working. Civilian labor force statistics include non-military workers and unemployed Kentuckians who are actively seeking work. They do not include unemployed Kentuckians who have not looked for employment within the past four weeks. The statistics in this news release are not seasonally adjusted to allow for comparisons between United States, state and counties figures."

http://www.workforcekentucky.ky.gov/article.asp?PAGEID=4&SUBID=&articleID=437

If someone is not looking thru the unemployment office in the last 4 weeks they are dropped form the tally ie are counted as employed. once unemployment benefits run out who goes back to the unemplyoyment office ?

Have you ever used the unemployment office to find a job ?

Yes, after I was discharged from the Navy.

Those same conditions existed when the same numbers meant "full employment" even to lefties.

It is funny as hell you post in a thread where they are having trouble finding employees how terrible the employment rate is.

It isn't "spin" it is what the economists said, and still say, about it.

There are always anecdotal stories of people having hard times, they even existed during the Clinton years.

And I also notice that none of your statistics pointed to any place with 15%. Who is spinning?

I am simply pointing out that the current national unemployment rate is, and was in the past, considered full employment. There are always those in transition and there are always a few places going through a transition, but it doesn't change what it is termed.

 

[Damocles]

I don't not care if God says it the full employment spins is crapola.

It is also interesting to note that my wife, who stays at home, is considered unemployed in these numbers and that the rate of stay at home mothers in our area is high. It is likely our county might match one of those 8% statistics just based on that alone.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

It is also interesting to note that my wife, who stays at home, is considered unemployed in these numbers and that the rate of stay at home mothers in our area is high. It is likely our county might match one of those 8% statistics just based on that alone.

No, she's not considered unemployed. A person who has no job and isn't looking for a job isn't considered "unemployed", otherwise the unemployed percentage would obviously be a lot bigger.

 

[Damocles]

No, she's not considered unemployed. A person who has no job and isn't looking for a job isn't considered "unemployed", otherwise the unemployed percentage would obviously be a lot bigger.

It depends on which numbers are being used. When my wife quit she was most definitely included in the numbers for the beginning of the downturn. The estimates talking about those who haven't looked for jobs, those are usually done by phone polls, would include my wife indefinitely.

There would also be students leaving their work in the summer, the first four weeks would be considered for the unemployment numbers. We can fatten them further, but there really is no need. When you look it always states. "Note unemployment numbers are just an estimate." Even on the bottom of the site that usc linked to you will see this disclaimer with the explanation of the 'within the past four weeks'.

I can say that the unemployment rate using 'the last four weeks' is about to spike. How many students recently quit. After four weeks it will fall again as they will have fallen out of the numbers used to make their estimates as they wouldn't have looked for work during those last few weeks.

Anyway, either way, the numbers at this time are not as dire as previously reported.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes, after I was discharged from the Navy.

Those same conditions existed when the same numbers meant "full employment" even to lefties.

It is funny as hell you post in a thread where they are having trouble finding employees how terrible the employment rate is.

It isn't "spin" it is what the economists said, and still say, about it.

There are always anecdotal stories of people having hard times, they even existed during the Clinton years.

And I also notice that none of your statistics pointed to any place with 15%. Who is spinning?

I am simply pointing out that the current national unemployment rate is, and was in the past, considered full employment. There are always those in transition and there are always a few places going through a transition, but it doesn't change what it is termed.

And that is my point. The termed phrase of full employment is garbage and just a political tool.

 

[uscitizen]

It is also interesting to note that my wife, who stays at home, is considered unemployed in these numbers and that the rate of stay at home mothers in our area is high. It is likely our county might match one of those 8% statistics just based on that alone.

Umm not in KY if you read the note at the bottom anyone not actively searching for employment in the past 4 weeks......
I expect CO is similar.

NOTE: Unemployment statistics are based on estimates and are compiled to measure trends rather than actually to count people working. Civilian labor force statistics include non-military workers and unemployed Kentuckians who are actively seeking work. They do not include unemployed Kentuckians who have not looked for employment within the past four weeks. The statistics in this news release are not seasonally adjusted to allow for comparisons between United States, state and counties figures."

 

[Damocles]

Umm not in KY if you read the note at the bottom anyone not actively searching for employment in the past 4 weeks......
I expect CO is similar.

NOTE: Unemployment statistics are based on estimates and are compiled to measure trends rather than actually to count people working. Civilian labor force statistics include non-military workers and unemployed Kentuckians who are actively seeking work. They do not include unemployed Kentuckians who have not looked for employment within the past four weeks. The statistics in this news release are not seasonally adjusted to allow for comparisons between United States, state and counties figures."

You didn't read did you? I explained the difference between two different ways of reporting. And yes she would be, for the first four weeks. My particular county pretty much everybody works, their property is their job.

Anyway on the second type of reporting where they do a telephone poll, she would definitely be counted indefinitely.

 

[uscitizen]

You didn't read did you? I explained the difference between two different ways of reporting. And yes she would be, for the first four weeks. My particular county pretty much everybody works, their property is their job.

Anyway on the second type of reporting where they do a telephone poll, she would definitely be counted indefinitely.

Only if she was registering at the unemployment office I think damo.

 

[Damocles]

Only if she was registering at the unemployment office I think damo.

Nope, if you lose employment and then do not seek it, it takes 4 weeks to remove you from their counts.

As for the second type of reporting, the polling, homemakers are considered to be 'unemployed'.