NYT article on long term unemployment is odd
We all know that long term unemployment is a problem in this country, as the longer without work the less sparkling one's resume becomes, the knowledge base in this technology driven economy begins to stagnate, and long term networks of contacts begin to diminish. The lead business section article in the NYT today was "Long Out of Work, and Running Out of Options".
It's a topic well worth covering. The odd thing about the article is that the journalist chose as his main example someone whose story doesn't add up. The 57 year old gentleman "lost his position at a large marketing firm last March" and is looking for other jobs in his field but has not found anything yet. He has an undergraduate degree from an Ivy League school and an MBA from the University of Chicago. Now he scrappily works three part time jobs to stay afloat and provide for his wife and children who he "struggles to support".
One year of unemployment and he has difficulty meeting his mortgage payments, has built up credit card debt, "wiped out his retirement accounts and has even contemplated selling his house". How did this highly educated former manager who is lauded in the article for his extensive experience in marketing across the business spectrum, from start-up firms to large financial institutions, end up in this predicament so quickly?
Were he and his family big spenders who lived beyond their means? Did they have zero savings? Was he a corporate hanger-on who avoided risk and was not successful enough to have an especially good job, his skill being blending in with others rather than the upward climb that his seniority and background would suggest? The point here is that great recession or no great recession, higher unemployment levels or not, this gentleman may not have been on the right path. He eventually could have been laid off in any scenario and his resume and his recommendations might reflect that to some degree.
He received unemployment benefits from March through December, and now is without them. He is in a tough situation that one can certainly sympathize with. How he got into this position is unclear, and makes the journalist's choice to make him the face of the article questionable. There is something missing here. Is he a relative or friend of the journalist who provided a ready story? Who knows, but so many better choices must definitely be out there that would highlight the long term unemployment trap much more poignantly.
It's a topic well worth covering. The odd thing about the article is that the journalist chose as his main example someone whose story doesn't add up. The 57 year old gentleman "lost his position at a large marketing firm last March" and is looking for other jobs in his field but has not found anything yet. He has an undergraduate degree from an Ivy League school and an MBA from the University of Chicago. Now he scrappily works three part time jobs to stay afloat and provide for his wife and children who he "struggles to support".
One year of unemployment and he has difficulty meeting his mortgage payments, has built up credit card debt, "wiped out his retirement accounts and has even contemplated selling his house". How did this highly educated former manager who is lauded in the article for his extensive experience in marketing across the business spectrum, from start-up firms to large financial institutions, end up in this predicament so quickly?
Were he and his family big spenders who lived beyond their means? Did they have zero savings? Was he a corporate hanger-on who avoided risk and was not successful enough to have an especially good job, his skill being blending in with others rather than the upward climb that his seniority and background would suggest? The point here is that great recession or no great recession, higher unemployment levels or not, this gentleman may not have been on the right path. He eventually could have been laid off in any scenario and his resume and his recommendations might reflect that to some degree.
He received unemployment benefits from March through December, and now is without them. He is in a tough situation that one can certainly sympathize with. How he got into this position is unclear, and makes the journalist's choice to make him the face of the article questionable. There is something missing here. Is he a relative or friend of the journalist who provided a ready story? Who knows, but so many better choices must definitely be out there that would highlight the long term unemployment trap much more poignantly.
posted by John Borden at 5:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home