Anonymous wrote:I just spent 4 months looking for a new role due to a merger. I interviewed a ton but only one offer, in person, after years of remote work. Remote work in my field has dried up. I accepted it and will commute. It's not my favorite but it is far from a deal breaker as not working is the actual issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will need to point my unemployed friends to this thread because it seems that they are unemployed by choice. Apparently they are so many sectors hiring.

People don't just want any jobs. We are hiring without any experience and the pay goes from $18 an hour to $40 an hour within months. We cannot find workers.

Please identify the industry of “we are hiring.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will need to point my unemployed friends to this thread because it seems that they are unemployed by choice. Apparently they are so many sectors hiring.

People don't just want any jobs. We are hiring without any experience and the pay goes from $18 an hour to $40 an hour within months. We cannot find workers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone i know who is looking for a job and can't find one "needs" WFH. That well is totally dry. They are willing to take a big pay cut as long as they don't have to actually go in. I know multiple lab scientists (my job) who are trying to do "medical billing" etc at less than half the pay because it's from home. The whole world is fighting over those jobs.
All the unfilled jobs are those that must be done in person.

My friend in Bethesda call me up she was laid off. She wants 100 percent renote, no OT, flex she can go to bus stop, do chores go to kids things at school, in summer have time make meals. She is ok hybrid two days a week as long as within 10 minutes of her house. She want 150base and a 40k bonus with a months vacation action. She is out of work 9 months.

I had a job in McLean in person but she was like no way driving to VA or in person s no thanks.

This is just a person who can afford not to work. They have wealth or DH has a high salary. So she's very picky and fine being unemployed. So what?

Just lazy, bought house back in 2011 when cheap and refinanced in 2020 and husband is a Fed. Like a lot of people will only work if conditions suit them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone i know who is looking for a job and can't find one "needs" WFH. That well is totally dry. They are willing to take a big pay cut as long as they don't have to actually go in. I know multiple lab scientists (my job) who are trying to do "medical billing" etc at less than half the pay because it's from home. The whole world is fighting over those jobs.
All the unfilled jobs are those that must be done in person.

My friend in Bethesda call me up she was laid off. She wants 100 percent renote, no OT, flex she can go to bus stop, do chores go to kids things at school, in summer have time make meals. She is ok hybrid two days a week as long as within 10 minutes of her house. She want 150base and a 40k bonus with a months vacation action. She is out of work 9 months.

I had a job in McLean in person but she was like no way driving to VA or in person s no thanks.

This is just a person who can afford not to work. They have wealth or DH has a high salary. So she's very picky and fine being unemployed. So what?

Just lazy, bought house back in 2011 when cheap and refinanced in 2020 and husband is a Fed. Like a lot of people will only work if conditions suit them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home health aide!! There are so many old people who want to age in their homes and not move to assisted living, and that number is only going to increase in the future.

+1! We have been searching for this for my mom. So many home health care agencies hire illegal immigrants because most citizens don’t want to do this job for the pay. It’s a mess!

Fixed it for you. For the right money, I'd happily take care of your mom, and I'd be great at it. But it's hard work, often with odd hours, and anybody you'd trust is also qualified to do something else that pays at least as well.

We were paying $35 an hour, legal, for home health caregivers for Mom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. They drove her around, prepared meals, and walked with her (several miles a day.)

I assume you are paying that to a company, I bet the actual worker is getting $20 per hour or less.

They might be getting that rate of pay, but they are employed, which puts them way ahead anyone who is unemployed, no matter how credentialed they are.

This is the core of the issue - jobs most definitely exist, but many people won't deign to take them because of the lack of WFH, the low pay, the lack of prestige, or the perceived/real onerous character of the work. But preferring to be unemployed to feeling underemployed is a choice, and does not mean jobs are not there. Choosing unemployment over underemployment is not at all the same as "but there are no jobs!". You may be able to say you can't find a job you want or like, but that's different.

A job that comes nowhere near paying my bills is not a viable option. Let's say, just as an extreme example, that I work 8 hours a day for $1. Is it really better to be "employed" than unemployed in that case? There are other things I can do with my time, including take care of my kids, try to start a business, go back to school, move to a completely new area. All of those would be better than a job that takes up all of my time but doesn't pay enough for rent and groceries.

And yes, these jobs you have in mind pay more than a dollar a day, but people are making the same calculus when they decide whether to waste their time.

So, you prefer no income to a low income? That's fine, but that's also your choice, and forms no basis for claiming "there are no jobs".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone i know who is looking for a job and can't find one "needs" WFH. That well is totally dry. They are willing to take a big pay cut as long as they don't have to actually go in. I know multiple lab scientists (my job) who are trying to do "medical billing" etc at less than half the pay because it's from home. The whole world is fighting over those jobs.
All the unfilled jobs are those that must be done in person.

My friend in Bethesda call me up she was laid off. She wants 100 percent renote, no OT, flex she can go to bus stop, do chores go to kids things at school, in summer have time make meals. She is ok hybrid two days a week as long as within 10 minutes of her house. She want 150base and a 40k bonus with a months vacation action. She is out of work 9 months.

I had a job in McLean in person but she was like no way driving to VA or in person s no thanks.

This is just a person who can afford not to work. They have wealth or DH has a high salary. So she's very picky and fine being unemployed. So what?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home health aide!! There are so many old people who want to age in their homes and not move to assisted living, and that number is only going to increase in the future.

+1! We have been searching for this for my mom. So many home health care agencies hire illegal immigrants because most citizens don’t want to do this job for the pay. It’s a mess!

Fixed it for you. For the right money, I'd happily take care of your mom, and I'd be great at it. But it's hard work, often with odd hours, and anybody you'd trust is also qualified to do something else that pays at least as well.

We were paying $35 an hour, legal, for home health caregivers for Mom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. They drove her around, prepared meals, and walked with her (several miles a day.)

I assume you are paying that to a company, I bet the actual worker is getting $20 per hour or less.

They might be getting that rate of pay, but they are employed, which puts them way ahead anyone who is unemployed, no matter how credentialed they are.

This is the core of the issue - jobs most definitely exist, but many people won't deign to take them because of the lack of WFH, the low pay, the lack of prestige, or the perceived/real onerous character of the work. But preferring to be unemployed to feeling underemployed is a choice, and does not mean jobs are not there. Choosing unemployment over underemployment is not at all the same as "but there are no jobs!". You may be able to say you can't find a job you want or like, but that's different.

A job that comes nowhere near paying my bills is not a viable option. Let's say, just as an extreme example, that I work 8 hours a day for $1. Is it really better to be "employed" than unemployed in that case? There are other things I can do with my time, including take care of my kids, try to start a business, go back to school, move to a completely new area. All of those would be better than a job that takes up all of my time but doesn't pay enough for rent and groceries.

And yes, these jobs you have in mind pay more than a dollar a day, but people are making the same calculus when they decide whether to waste their time.

So, you prefer no income to a low income? That's fine, but that's also your choice, and forms no basis for claiming "there are no jobs".

If it costs me more to work for you than to not work at all, that "job opening" is not real in any meaningful way.
Just like if I list my modest house for $9 million, that is not a real contribution to the housing market and people could correctly say "there's nothing available."

Flip it around: when employers say "we can't find anyone to hire," that's obviously untrue. What they can't find is a qualified candidate who wants to do that job for the pay offered.

Exactly. The game is rigged. They want people to be slaves, like h1b, and pay h1b salaries. Healthcare is another example where insurance companies book multibillion profits quarterly, but caregivers are expected to work for just above minimum wage.

Your obsession with H1B is weird.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone i know who is looking for a job and can't find one "needs" WFH. That well is totally dry. They are willing to take a big pay cut as long as they don't have to actually go in. I know multiple lab scientists (my job) who are trying to do "medical billing" etc at less than half the pay because it's from home. The whole world is fighting over those jobs.
All the unfilled jobs are those that must be done in person.

My friend in Bethesda call me up she was laid off. She wants 100 percent renote, no OT, flex she can go to bus stop, do chores go to kids things at school, in summer have time make meals. She is ok hybrid two days a week as long as within 10 minutes of her house. She want 150base and a 40k bonus with a months vacation action. She is out of work 9 months.

I had a job in McLean in person but she was like no way driving to VA or in person s no thanks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dod engineering and cyber. With clearances and certs. Lots of openings and they are real. (Company I work for is hiring). But no remote options.

Same here. Defense industry. Only some of the jobs are remote but not for the engineers.

Yeah nobody wants to pee in the cup several times a year for the privilege of earning H1b salary

There are no H1B employees at my workplace. US citizenship is a requirement. I’ve never had to pee in a cup. But if you don’t like even the possibility of a drug test, a job requiring a clearance is not for you.

DoD salaries generally top out at $300k unless you are BD. That's peanuts for tech, ie, H1B salary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home health aide!! There are so many old people who want to age in their homes and not move to assisted living, and that number is only going to increase in the future.

+1! We have been searching for this for my mom. So many home health care agencies hire illegal immigrants because most citizens don’t want to do this job for the pay. It’s a mess!

Fixed it for you. For the right money, I'd happily take care of your mom, and I'd be great at it. But it's hard work, often with odd hours, and anybody you'd trust is also qualified to do something else that pays at least as well.

We were paying $35 an hour, legal, for home health caregivers for Mom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. They drove her around, prepared meals, and walked with her (several miles a day.)

I assume you are paying that to a company, I bet the actual worker is getting $20 per hour or less.

They might be getting that rate of pay, but they are employed, which puts them way ahead anyone who is unemployed, no matter how credentialed they are.

This is the core of the issue - jobs most definitely exist, but many people won't deign to take them because of the lack of WFH, the low pay, the lack of prestige, or the perceived/real onerous character of the work. But preferring to be unemployed to feeling underemployed is a choice, and does not mean jobs are not there. Choosing unemployment over underemployment is not at all the same as "but there are no jobs!". You may be able to say you can't find a job you want or like, but that's different.

A job that comes nowhere near paying my bills is not a viable option. Let's say, just as an extreme example, that I work 8 hours a day for $1. Is it really better to be "employed" than unemployed in that case? There are other things I can do with my time, including take care of my kids, try to start a business, go back to school, move to a completely new area. All of those would be better than a job that takes up all of my time but doesn't pay enough for rent and groceries.

And yes, these jobs you have in mind pay more than a dollar a day, but people are making the same calculus when they decide whether to waste their time.

So, you prefer no income to a low income? That's fine, but that's also your choice, and forms no basis for claiming "there are no jobs".

If it costs me more to work for you than to not work at all, that "job opening" is not real in any meaningful way.
Just like if I list my modest house for $9 million, that is not a real contribution to the housing market and people could correctly say "there's nothing available."

Flip it around: when employers say "we can't find anyone to hire," that's obviously untrue. What they can't find is a qualified candidate who wants to do that job for the pay offered.

Exactly. The game is rigged. They want people to be slaves, like h1b, and pay h1b salaries. Healthcare is another example where insurance companies book multibillion profits quarterly, but caregivers are expected to work for just above minimum wage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home health aide!! There are so many old people who want to age in their homes and not move to assisted living, and that number is only going to increase in the future.

+1! We have been searching for this for my mom. So many home health care agencies hire illegal immigrants because most citizens don’t want to do this job for the pay. It’s a mess!

Fixed it for you. For the right money, I'd happily take care of your mom, and I'd be great at it. But it's hard work, often with odd hours, and anybody you'd trust is also qualified to do something else that pays at least as well.

We were paying $35 an hour, legal, for home health caregivers for Mom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. They drove her around, prepared meals, and walked with her (several miles a day.)

I assume you are paying that to a company, I bet the actual worker is getting $20 per hour or less.

They might be getting that rate of pay, but they are employed, which puts them way ahead anyone who is unemployed, no matter how credentialed they are.

This is the core of the issue - jobs most definitely exist, but many people won't deign to take them because of the lack of WFH, the low pay, the lack of prestige, or the perceived/real onerous character of the work. But preferring to be unemployed to feeling underemployed is a choice, and does not mean jobs are not there. Choosing unemployment over underemployment is not at all the same as "but there are no jobs!". You may be able to say you can't find a job you want or like, but that's different.

A job that comes nowhere near paying my bills is not a viable option. Let's say, just as an extreme example, that I work 8 hours a day for $1. Is it really better to be "employed" than unemployed in that case? There are other things I can do with my time, including take care of my kids, try to start a business, go back to school, move to a completely new area. All of those would be better than a job that takes up all of my time but doesn't pay enough for rent and groceries.

And yes, these jobs you have in mind pay more than a dollar a day, but people are making the same calculus when they decide whether to waste their time.

So, you prefer no income to a low income? That's fine, but that's also your choice, and forms no basis for claiming "there are no jobs".

If it costs me more to work for you than to not work at all, that "job opening" is not real in any meaningful way.
Just like if I list my modest house for $9 million, that is not a real contribution to the housing market and people could correctly say "there's nothing available."

Flip it around: when employers say "we can't find anyone to hire," that's obviously untrue. What they can't find is a qualified candidate who wants to do that job for the pay offered.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home health aide!! There are so many old people who want to age in their homes and not move to assisted living, and that number is only going to increase in the future.

+1! We have been searching for this for my mom. So many home health care agencies hire illegal immigrants because most citizens don’t want to do this job for the pay. It’s a mess!

Fixed it for you. For the right money, I'd happily take care of your mom, and I'd be great at it. But it's hard work, often with odd hours, and anybody you'd trust is also qualified to do something else that pays at least as well.

We were paying $35 an hour, legal, for home health caregivers for Mom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. They drove her around, prepared meals, and walked with her (several miles a day.)

I assume you are paying that to a company, I bet the actual worker is getting $20 per hour or less.

They might be getting that rate of pay, but they are employed, which puts them way ahead anyone who is unemployed, no matter how credentialed they are.

This is the core of the issue - jobs most definitely exist, but many people won't deign to take them because of the lack of WFH, the low pay, the lack of prestige, or the perceived/real onerous character of the work. But preferring to be unemployed to feeling underemployed is a choice, and does not mean jobs are not there. Choosing unemployment over underemployment is not at all the same as "but there are no jobs!". You may be able to say you can't find a job you want or like, but that's different.

A job that comes nowhere near paying my bills is not a viable option. Let's say, just as an extreme example, that I work 8 hours a day for $1. Is it really better to be "employed" than unemployed in that case? There are other things I can do with my time, including take care of my kids, try to start a business, go back to school, move to a completely new area. All of those would be better than a job that takes up all of my time but doesn't pay enough for rent and groceries.

And yes, these jobs you have in mind pay more than a dollar a day, but people are making the same calculus when they decide whether to waste their time.

So, you prefer no income to a low income? That's fine, but that's also your choice, and forms no basis for claiming "there are no jobs".