I’m looking for an answer to this question that is based in Marxist analysis.
You know what I’m talking about. Job positions that required advanced degrees when they previously required undergraduate degrees, positions that require bachelors degrees when they used to just require high school, positions that previously had no formal education requirements but now require a high school diploma, etc. Along with jobs that require more experience when they previously required less or even none.
The most common answer I find is more advanced technology but I don’t think that’s the full picture. Can you guys explain?
There are several factors here,
-
A candidate with an advanced degree (theoretically) requires less training/can be trusted with more important work. Also training an employee is a large economic cost (ie loss of potential profit), companies want to minimize training
-
Most people who have degrees have loans, a debtor makes a reliable worker because they need your paycheck
-
HR famously never understands the actual job and they take the qualities a perfect candidate would have and posts those as required
-
You don’t need a Marxist analysis for that. It’s just markets. If labor is in supply enough that an employer thinks they can get it if they ask, then they will. Back during the great recession, there was a McDonald’s in NYC that made the news for requiring a college degree to work the register.
In US history, boomers pushed their kids to go to college, bc for them, that was the best way to a good career, bc those people were in short supply. Now, most people are college people and trades are in a shortage.
Honestly, be a plumber.
Labor unions give you 50 an hour for apprenticeships, at least where I am.
it’s just plain old supply and demand
from a marxist view, there is something to be said about how the boom/bust cycle of capitalism incentivized people to get college degrees (and in recent years, tech-oriented degrees in particular) during the boom phase, which created an oversupply that more than meets the demand now that we are in/approaching the bust phase
In addition to what others have said, liability is also a factor. If you don’t work out, it’s because you somehow lied about being able to do the job and not that their training was inadequate or that they failed to prepare/equip you. Additionally, less training is required theoretically, which means less cost on the investment of a new employee. Less risk overall for presumably better results.
Lack of experience also means they have deniability not to hire someone. I’ve had interviews go south immediately when the interviewer realized I was LGBTQ+ (stealth fail), but their stated reason was that I didn’t have enough experience with MacOS. I’ve done volunteer work in my field for the UN using MacOS, but alas, I was “too inexperienced”. The higher the requirements, the safer those sorts of dismissals are for them to make.
