Highlights From the Fall 2000 NECA Newsletter
Counseling and A Troubled Generation
Margaret Robinson - President 2000-2001
Have you noticed lately how often the media reports on issues concerning: Violence in the Work Place, Road Rage, Criminal Acts in the communities, and increased School Violence? Why has this behavior been energized? What needs exist that have caused these actions to take place?
In earlier years, one might have surmised that deviant behavior in a specific generation was caused by the need to solicit acceptance from others, for self-preservation, to gain self-respect, for self-expression or some other reason that was not necessarily acceptable, but might have been understandable. It is the "earlier" thinking that may inspire such present reactions as: "I can hardly believe that actually happened right in my office, it was AWFUL." "That driver MUST be crazy!" "Things like that just don't happen here, not in THIS neighborhood." "What would make a youngster DO such a horrible thing?"
In more recent years, the reasons for deviant behavior in a specific generation seem to be at a deeper level and somewhat opaque. The causes even appear to be distorted. Take, for example, the case of a person who was sitting in a car at a red light when he suddenly shot and killed the driver in the car next to him because he "didn't like the music" the other driver had playing on his radio.
Too often, there seems to be no logical reason for abhorrent behavior. Perhaps, that is the problem. We may be trying to apply logic to illogical thoughts and actions. The actions described above are obviously those of people who are having serious problems. They are also part of a troubled generation that they and others have helped to create. The troubled generation is beyond the person who is guilty of deviant behavior. The real troubled generation is the generation that becomes a victim of the causes for deviant behavior. We are in a time when tension, stress and frustrations are not uncommon. These emotions exist for various reasons, such as corporate merging and downsizing, inadequate parental guidance, job loss due to lack of skills for current technological needs, no company loyalty to the "loyal" employee, too little time for "quality time" at home, etc. We are well aware that what ever happens to an employee at work, affects not only the employee but that employee's entire family.
The counselor's training and knowledge are needed now more than ever. There is a need for increased availability of counseling in the workplace, the community and the schools. Counselors are cognizant of changes that are too frequently missed by untrained observers. With increased public awareness of the benefits of professional counseling, counselors can have a definite positive impact on troubled generations.
COMPLACENT DOESN'T CUT IT
Bill Fenson, President-elect
Our workforce, like everything else, is changing drastically. We, as employment counselors, must work and learn continually to keep abreast of the changes.
Not only are the faces we see in the workplace changing, but the places they work, the hours, the jobs themselves, the process of managing employees - none are the same as they were forty, thirty or even ten years ago. Are we, the employment counselors, flexible enough to change with the workforce? Do we know the newest work force developments and the challenges and problems presented by the changes?
The first issue that comes to mind is the Telecommuter. According to Jack Nilles, founder and head of JALA International, Inc., who coined the term in 1973, there were no more than 2000 telecommuters in the United States in 1970. This number increased to 100,000 in 1980, 2.4 million in 1990, and is expected to jump to a whopping 24.7 million by the end of this year - that's 18% of the US workforce. This trend is projected to multiply annually by 18%. How many employment counselors are aware of the problems presented by the teleworker, much less the answers to the problems? What of the benefits? Do any of us know how to manage this group, how to determine which employees would be self-directed enough to be a productive teleworker, and how to quantify the results of the telecommuter's labors? And then there is the contingent workforce, those self-employed contract employees or consultants, for whom a workday may seem endless, with little relaxation, vacation or benefit package. Are we aware of the solutions to these issues? How familiar are we with the ever increasing number of contingent agencies and the services, benefits and awards they are offering to lure contractors to the ranks of their firms? Do we understand the value of this workforce and the solutions and problems created for the employer by the use of this workforce?
What about the technological/computer industry, with its ever-expanding role and its crucial human resource shortage? Are we aware of the positions cropping up, changing almost daily - do we even know the lingo, or the job specifications or required training or schooling?
We also must consider the issue of rage in the workplace - or rage that spills over from the workplace. Twenty years ago no one would have envisioned this as an employment counseling topic. Then the term 'going postal" was penned. Workers had begun taking their down-sizings, terminations, and even their unrequited loves out on their co-workers, former co-workers, and employers. Guns entered the workplace. Do we employment counselors know how to guide an employer in recognizing the employee or ex-employee who might fly into a murderous rage? Anyone know what to say to a boss whose employees have been taken hostage - how to advise her or him to undo the psychological damage and feel safe again, and back on task?
What do we know of the issue of intolerance: diversity resistance, hate crimes, racial slurs, sexism? How much do we know of the prevalence of these problems, and the ways to teach employees to respect each other and "just all get along?" Do we know why this is continuing to happen? Do we have a plan to keep it from exploding in the workplace?
The last, and maybe most important issue I would wish us to ponder is that of renewal. If we, as counselors, cannot shake off the problems and the negativity of a bad yesterday, how can we walk into each new situation, each new client, and spur them on to success? If our own battery is low, we cannot be the 'beam of light' in the office. How do we cope with walking out the client's door that last day, not knowing if six months or two years down the road those that we strove to help will have found their success, their best path, due in part to our efforts? What keeps us motivated? What keeps us renewed? Think about it. Let's talk.
Education and Work
EDITOR'S MESSAGE - Andy Helwig
One of the challenging labor market dilemmas for me when I teach my Career Development class is to let students know how important education is and its relationship to occupational success. My students are at the master's level and have already experienced considerable educational success. They know that if they are to meet their professional goals, they must have a graduate degree and probably additional credentials such as national certification and state licensure.
However, to argue that everyone needs a high level of education to be occupationally successful is duplicitous. In fact, most occupations require less than a bachelor's degree. Current employment projection data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor indicates that only 22% of all jobs require a bachelor's or higher education. Turn that around and you see that 78% of workers do not need a college degree. In fact, over 39% of occupations need only 'short-term on-the-job training' which could be 30 minutes long. There is some evidence however, that jobs requiring an associate or higher degree will grow faster than average but the numbers are still small.
So why the big push for more and more educational achievement for our young people? Won't many be overqualified? Unhappy and dissatisfied? Perhaps even less employable because employers will think they won't stay?
As I talk with my students about the push to encourage high education for everyone despite the fact that most jobs require less than college, I am struck by two related sets of data which temper my remarks. First of all, the relationship between education and earnings per year are incontrovertible. There is a strong positive relationship between the two. For 1997, workers with less than a high school education had median earnings of $19,700. Median earnings for high school graduates was $26,000; some college, no degree workers, $30,400; associate degree, $31,700; bachelor's degrees, $40,100; and master's degree holders had median annual earnings of $50,000. How can you argue with that data? So even if the job outlook isn't good for more highly educated workers, in fact, the majority of them end up with jobs paying a lot more than for those with lower education.
Many workers who are educated at the associate or bachelor's levels in jobs not requiring such education, may become strong candidates for additional training and promotion to supervisory and management positions. The extra education is a clear signal to employers about the workers' intelligence, perseverance, and ability to learn. And they need such workers.
The other set of data which is strongly related to level of education forms an inverse relationship. There is a strong negative correlation between level of education and unemployment.
The more education workers have, the lower unemployment they suffer. For 1998, the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates that those workers educated below the high school level have a 7.1% unemployment rate. For each level of more education, the unemployment rate experienced is lower. At the highest level of education reported, for master's degree holders, the unemployment rate is only 1.6%. Thus, another clear message appears to be: to lower your likelihood of suffering unemployment, get as much education as you can.
New data published in September of 2000 in the Monthly Labor Review, provides evidence of the relationship between level of education and poverty rates. Using Current Population Survey data, persons in the labor force for at least 27 weeks or more in 1998 (employed or unemployed but looking) have a 14.5% poverty rate if their education level is less than high school. Only 6.6% of high school graduates are at the poverty level. For college graduates, only 1.4% are at the poverty level.
So how can one argue against education when looking at earnings, unemployment rates and poverty levels? The data are clear but remember, there are always exceptions. All of us know individuals with limited formal education who are doing very nicely, thank you. Based on interest, ability level, personality characteristics and a multitude of other variables, higher education is not for everyone. Or, it may make more sense for the individual later on in life. More important to the worker may be job satisfaction, a stressfree work environment, good interrelationships with other workers, and a 40-hour workweek. As it usually does, it boils down to what the specific individual wants given their particular circumstances. First and foremost, counselors must respect that.
For those who do not know, here are four good web sites: