“Caesar… Beware the Ides of March!”
The job market can be very cruel and hard on a person. Most times, that is the case for those of us who have lived through the times when America produced, manufactured, and exported most everything. Paying bills, sending your kid’s through college, buying a home and a car meant going to work and earning the things that most people value; the American dream. Getting a job was as easy as pie. Today, buying a hamburger can be a challenge.
Two or Four years of college yesterday were the norm for families that who could afford to send their children to college. Studying Liberal Arts and non essential courses would and could afford you a decent and high paying job. Today you need to specialize in college studies; Computer Science, Political Science, Pharmaceuticals, Medicine, Engineering, Economics, Teaching, etc.
Back in the day, most ground level opportunities would teach new employees the skills needed to perform their job. In many instances companies would send their employees out to different schools to be educated and or trained for a certain type of industrial or administrative expertise. This would possibly be sewing, machine operation(s), maintenance operations, cafeteria operations, keypunch operations, and whatever skills were needed…for free…as long as you intended to stay in your line of work and or stay with the company for a particular tenure. Benchmark that with what happens today in the so-called job market.
Many countries and businesses have always outsourced their wares and services. By today’s standards, outsourcing is the job market! Many have thought and believed a good example of outsourcing can be referred to The North American Free Trade Agreement, “NAFTA.” It was designed to help citizens and working folk rather than alienate people in the work force as well as those who aspire to become a part of it.
“Accord de libre-échange nord-américain [ALENA]) is a trilateral trade bloc in North America created by the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The agreements were signed in December 1992 by the leaders of the three countries – Brian Mulroney of Canada, Carlos Salinas de Gortari of Mexico, and Bill Clinton of the United States but did not come into effect until January 1, 1994. In terms of combined purchasing power parity GDP of its members, as of 2007 the trade bloc is the largest in the world and second largest by nominal GDP comparison.” *
“The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has two supplements, the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and the North American Agreement on Labo(u)r Cooperation (NAALC).” *
“The effects of NAFTA, both positive and negative, have been quantified by several economists, whose findings have been reported in publications such as the World Bank’s Lessons from NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean, NAFTA’s Impact on North America, and NAFTA Revisited by the Institute for International Economics. Some argue that NAFTA has been positive for Mexico, which has seen its poverty rates fall and real income rise, even after accounting for the 1994-1995 economic crisis. Others argue that NAFTA has been beneficial to business owners and elites in all three countries, but has had negative impacts on farmers in Mexico who saw food prices fall based on cheap imports from U.S. agribusiness, and negative impacts on U.S. workers in manufacturing and assembly industries who lost jobs. Critics also argue that NAFTA has contributed to the rising levels of inequality in both the U.S. and Mexico. Some economists believe that NAFTA has not been enough (or worked fast enough) to produce an economic convergence, nor to substantially reduce poverty rates. Some have suggested that in order to fully benefit from the agreement, Mexico must invest more in education and promote innovation in infrastructure and agriculture.” *
“Public opinion toward NAFTA in the United States, Canada, and Mexico is mixed. A July 2004 survey conducted by CIDE and COMEXI in Mexico showed that 64 percent of the Mexican public favored NAFTA. The Program on International Policy Attitudes reported in a January 2004 poll that 47 percent of Americans thought that NAFTA has been good for the United States, while 39 percent thought it had been bad for the country. A recent Rasmussen report shows that only 16% of likely Democratic voters in the 2008 presidential election support NAFTA, while 53% disapprove of the trade agreement.” *
“A Canadian poll conducted in June 2003 by Ipsos Reid found that 70 percent of Canadians supported NAFTA, while only 26 percent were opposed. However, a May 2004 Ipsos poll found that “Six in ten Canadians (62 percent) disagree that Canada should sign a trade agreement that would open Canada’s public services to competition from foreign companies” and “A further six in ten (60 percent) disagree that government should sign deals that would allow corporations to directly sue the Government of Canada if our public policies impair their ability to make profits”. *
“Despite their support for NAFTA, the polls in Canada and Mexico have tended to show that citizens see their own country as the loser in NAFTA, and to see the United States as the winner. The U.S. public has viewed Mexico as the winner and has been narrowly divided about whether the United States is a winner or loser in NAFTA.” *
“In 2000, Mexican President Vicente Fox advocated the idea of free flow of people across the U.S.-Mexico border as a second phase of NAFTA, which would be completed in ten years. However, negotiations ceased after the 9/11 attacks, when debate in the United States shifted towards an immigration policy with security as its main goal.” *
“Developments in early 2006 brought the Mexican-U.S. border and United States immigration debate to the center stage in American politics. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 provided for 700 miles of high security fence, to be built in regions of the border subject to high rates of illegal crossings. To this date only seven miles of fence have been built, with the U.S. Congress wavering on its decision. The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 would have granted illegal immigrants already in the country a way forward to stay and gain citizenship. It would also have provided up to 200,000 placements per year for guest workers. On June 28, 2007, the bill failed cloture in the Senate, largely due to public outcry, and no further action was taken.” *
See Wikipedia – *NAFTA
Attending college for young people is a challenge (let alone getting through high school) today. The young have time. For the not-so-young, it’s a monumental achievement! It’s the most necessary tool allowed to older folk alluding to, or the allusion of getting a higher paying job as opposed to living and/or working on or at the bottom of the food chain for the rest of their life. For most people of the working class, (particularly people of color), who have… more than any other group, remain at the bottom of the food chain appears to have been planned, promoted, coordinated, and implemented in order to keep the balance, order, and separation of the “Haves – and – the Have Nots.” Attending college for most older folk and all people of different hues and color have proven to be paramount in the ascent to a higher paying job and the station and/or position of life that coincides. The college diploma is supposed to represent the individual achievement, sacrifices, character, potential, intelligence, and aspirations of the person reaching for that higher goal. It should also represent the quality of worker that the employer will gain in order to enhance his or her business while aiding in the businesses ability to become more competitive and desirable for the countries’ stability as well as success in the world markets. When it becomes more and more difficult for the domestic populace to access the jobs desired, the demise of the domestic economy is compromised.
Outsourcing jobs that our people have studied and trained for has proven to not only break the back of our economy, but to break the backs of our countrys’ finest and most dedicated scholars, professionals, and workers.
I have previously written and critiqued some of the difficulties in the hiring practices in the job-market, i.e., “Age Discrimination”, “Legal Employment Discrimination”, and”The Credit Report, Does It Help or Hurt?” In one of my statements I brought up the issue of hiring personnel in the money handling industry. I’ve agreed that a different type of screening is necessary for background checks of individuals who are potential candidates for those types of jobs. In the beginning of drug testing and back ground checks, the intention was to weed out the unsafe machinists and transportation workers as well as screening for governmental careers. The practice has progressed into jobs that were not previously considered “safety sensitive.” Of course one does not want persons with histories of stealing, bank robbery, armed robbery, extortion, embezzlement, identity theft, credit card fraud, and/or computer hacking in the business of finances. However, does a person with a less than perfect credit score qualify for such treatment? When a working class person encounters some form of economic crisis does that make him or her a bad risk to handle a job outside his or her home life?
Everyday working people face financial crises on a daily basis. People deal and face situations where a family member becomes ill, has an accident and is temporarily disabled and can’t work, the baby needs an emergency operation, the mother or father of the immediate household losses a job for some reason or another, the roof on the house has caved in where the insurance does not cover all of the costs involved, the car is in need of a new transmission. Certainly, the car is mandatory in order to get to work because the job is not accessible to public transportation. Many life situations occur and causes one to forego paying one or two bills in order to deal with the crisis at hand. This in turn causes one to become delinquent or to fall behind in one’s obligations. This was not intentional. It just happened. The three credit bureaus, it seems, are delighted in reporting a bad track record enabling many entities to capitalize on the misgivings of the working class. The utilization of your credit report can and will keep you out of the job market. Is it fair to assess the dependability, accountability, credibility, character, and ability of a person to successfully maintain, and perform in a professional manner. Should the job and responsibilities at hand be based upon their personal dilemma’s? Is it not protocol in order to pay one’s debts that one must go to work in order to honor the debt? How does the debt get paid if a person is not literally allowed to work or get the job needed in order to pay off the debt?
While it is an arguable point for employers to wonder if an employment candidate is dependable, able, or reliable based upon his of her personal habits. Credit should not be the determining factor in whether or not they are capable of handling the job. They should consider the candidates sacrifices in order to get that coveted job based upon the educational pursuits, work histories and performances, and in particular the candidates’ life skills. Any one person can fall behind in personal debt obligations based on the ability to pay. It is another thing if a person refuses to pay their debts as opposed to the desire to pay.
Outsourcing America’a jobs is the quintessential economy killer. The younger college graduates are not able to get the jobs within their interests while the older (in many cases and to no avail) graduates study and struggle to hang onto the jobs they currently posses.
Do you think the credit check is a good determining factor based on the aforementioned situations? How many college graduates do you know who are out of work and unable to get a job? What if it happened to you? If you or your significant other sacrifices life’s necessities for education and are unable to acquire the desired career, what would you do? How would you feel? How would you deal with it? What would happen to your family? Ask the folks who have gone through this, and continue to go do so. Ask the folk who have lost everything and are living in shelters and are stuck within the grip of poverty. Ask the people are losing and have lost their homes due to the current economic instability. How or what do you think people in such situations would say or do if they applied to a particular job in which they are skilled and qualified, but yet denied the opportunity because their credit rating is in the 600’s and not the 800’s? Many survivors of the “Great Depression” could probably tell of the horrors involved. Any poor person, Black, White, as well as other Races, Religions and Creeds could attest to the suffering and ruin. What is the government doing or going to do in order to retain its work-force talents and professionals?
While it is easy for one person to say to another person, collegiate or otherwise, “start your own business,” “become an entrepreneur!” “You don’t need to work for any body, work for yourself!” It’s easier said than done. In reality, you are working for yourself. Therefore, we are all (those of us who participate in the work force) entrepreneurs!
When you take on a job, whether it’s permanent, contracted, part-time, or otherwise, you are an “entrepreneur!” It is believed that when you are working for someone else, you are working for them and not yourself. That is not particularly True. We are being compensated for our work, efforts, and services. That practice is called “Trading or Bartering!” Everyone who works and holds down a job is an entrepreneur. You are giving or providing a services that is needed by others in order to receive something that is needed by you and yours’.The marketing tool is the resume or application. It can also be perceived to be your mission statement or business plan. The instrument relays to the prospective employer-client your intentions, aspirations, education, skills, abilities, character, previous employer-client satisfaction benchmarks history, and career destination.
The current financial recession in America (and the world) expresses the need for skilled workers and the services they provide. Why is it that employers (as well as the government) seem to make it more and more difficult for its people rather than striving to make life a little easier?
How about focusing on a person’s abilities, accomplishments, skills, aspirations, and contributions as a determining factor that allows a candidate to access a particular job rather than the standardized credit check?
If not, we will have proven that history can and does repeat itself…as well as self destruction. Be forewarned, the fall of an economy can kill…i.e.,”The Fall of the Roman Empire!” If America does not invest in itself…believe and have a little faith in its people…if America does not work it will incur its own demise.
While many families in crisis wait to see what America’s decision makers will do to make things right, “the beat goes on!”
“Brother can you spare the time in order for me to make a dime?”
Source by Gregory V. Boulware
Leave a Reply