Letters to the Editor - Wall Street Journal,  December 2, 2005

The Disposable Engineering Employee
At long last, you've published an article debunking the "engineering shortage" myth ("Behind 'Shortage' of Engineers: Employers Grow More Choosy," page one, Nov. 16). It is heartening to me, as a former engineer, that you elected to speak to sources other than the usual self-interested employers and academic boards and associations.

The fact that employers are able to cherry-pick job candidates suggests a surfeit rather than a shortage, which would force employers to lower the bar and exhibit a willingness to train "marginal" candidates. At least, that's how it works for every other discipline. Waiting months to fill a position because a candidate doesn't have the precise experience sought ignores the fact that someone could easily have been trained in the interim.

Remarkably absent from your account was the subject of compensation. Economics suggests that bonuses, more fringe benefits and higher salaries characterize a shortage. But your findings document hundreds of responses to advertisements, once again suggestive of a relative surplus.

 U.S. employers have long taken the availability of technical workers for granted and often treat them as contingent or disposable employees. I know. As a former operations analyst in a Fortune 500 engineering department I saw the emphasis shift from engineering productivity to the "hourly rate."

It is rational that employers lobby for a greater supply of engineers and scientists to hold down salaries, and academics and their proxies will, likewise, favor an increasing stream of students to enhance their own careers. But laid-off, early-retired engineers, and engineers forced to change careers, will counsel their sons and daughters to consider more rewarding professions. Then we will have a true shortage.

John Ortego
Carrollton, Texas

Equal Opportunity in Hiring - No Longer for Life-Long Learners
Bill Gates's statement that "there just aren't as many graduates with a computer-science background" demonstrates part of the problem. Based on what he said, Mr. Gates wouldn't hire himself. This issue isn't a lack of technically trained individuals; it is, rather, a mixture of a lack of common sense and an economic decision.

What you learn in most schools is, at best, obsolete within five years of graduation. If you are to remain current, you have to constantly re-educate yourself. Those hiring need to look at accomplishments, not some obsolete piece of paper earned five or more years before. That is why work accomplishments come before education on a resume.

But the main part of this "shortage" is technically trained individuals who are willing to work for $10 an hour. This is the real reason Mr. Gates and the rest of American industry is claiming there is a shortage and are crying for the expansion of the H1-B temporary work-visa program. They need to realize what Mr. Ford did more than 100 years ago: If you pay people a living wage, they can afford to buy your product; if you don't, they can't.

Chris Daly
Yucaipa, Calif.

Citizens and Green Card Holders - No Longer Recognized as Qualified
What has happened to the time-honored tradition of hiring individuals with the most promise and training them for the position to be filled? Unfortunately, now companies require instant returns and aren't worried about the future, leading to rejection of outstanding candidates who don't fit the mold.

Certainly such scientists as Steinmetz, Einstein and Fermi would never be employed under the present screening conditions for corporations. Employment isn't necessarily for the brightest but only for those who appear to fit the open position, with no lasting relationship formed between employer and employee.

Nelson Marans
Silver Spring, Md.

Copyright (C) 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved