Re: [tlug] [OT] A Question About Degrees

[Attila Kinali <attila@example.com>]

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:39:14 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com> wrote:

> Attila Kinali writes:
>  > >  > Hence i dont think that those who cannot atain a higher education
>  > >  > are fucked.
>  > > 
>  > > That is not what I said.  What I said is that those who don't get jobs
>  > > (corresponding to their educational level) are fucked.  What I have
>  > > been told by French and Spanish labor economists is that those who do
>  > > not succeed in getting jobs have no alternative but to go to graduate
>  > > school or be unemployed (but I repeat myself :-) or work at MacDonald's
>  > > (which is arguably somewhat useful to society, but doesn't pay anywhere
>  > > near as well as software engineering or architecture).
>  > 
>  > Hmm... I cannot talk about any country but Switzerland here, as i have
>  > very little knowledge about other countries job markets (maybe save
>  > Germany, where quite a few of my friends work).
>  > If you have an engineering degree (EE, mechanical, CS,...) in Switzerland,
>  > you are sure to find a job.
> 
> Sure, but according to you a "degree" in Europe even now means
> substantially more than a bachelor's degree in the U.S., perhaps in
> many fields equivalent to a second-rate MS in the U.S.

Maybe i should explain how the system here in Switzerland (and partialy
in Germany too) works these days:
The "normal" university degree is an MSc. Although the course is split
into a BSc and MSc, the BSc is meant only as a step in between and hardly
anyone stops there. The main use of the BSc for the students is to switch
universities, have a temporary break or to have at least "some degree"
when they want to pursue a different career path. The universities use
the BSc exams to filter their crop of students. This is done this late
because entry to the universities is free for anyone who has a high school
degree, but the universities would like to get rid of the students that
might not be able to reach their MSc degree as early as possible, because
they cost money.
A MSc course is usualy 4y in minimum, often 5y.

Beside the academic path, there is also the aprenticeship path, where the
students that did an apprenticeship rather then going to high school
would continue to a "Fachhochschule". This provides a higher education
to those, who want to advance their knowledge, but cannot enter a university
because of the lack of a high school degree. The degree you get there is
a BSc and takes 3 to 4 years.

Both, the Fachhoschule BSc and the University MSc are regarded with
approximately the same value in the fields of engineering. The main
difference between the academic path is, that the Fachhochschule
concentrates more on practical and hand-on skills rather than theory
and mathematics. Depending on the exact needs of your company, you choose
one or the other and the pays are approximately the same, with the
Fachhoschule BSc being a few percent lower in average.

> The OP in this
> thread was talking about an *associate* (2-year) degree; I'm thinking
> in terms of some post-high-school education, up to U.S. bachelor's
> degree.

Hmm.. then i must have misunderstood the OP. I thought he already had
some form of associate or equivalent degree and wanted to go to a BSc.
(The military technical educiation for non-combatant personel, i know about
is usually at least of the level of associate, often at BSc)


>  > I also know a few people from architecture and similar field that border
>  > between engineering and craft/art who did take an office job in a
>  > bank/insurance as well. Either because it was more secure than the
>  > alternatives or because of the higher pay.
> 
> For the Scandinavian countries, at least, getting a degree in
> architecture is pretty much a permanent ticket to underemployment.  So
> they come to Japan to get PhDs, and make things worse....

Interesting.
 
>  > > In the U.S. and to some extent in Japan, there are options such as
>  > > contract work.  Much less job security, less to no fringe benefits,
>  > > but the direct compensation is comparable (and sometimes substantially
>  > > higher), and you get experience relevant to permanent positions in
>  > > your field.
>  > 
>  > Same here. But with one big difference. These people count as self-employed
>  > in Switzerland. Which means they have to pay insurances, etc themselves.
>  > If they want to sustain a business (which most want) then they will
>  > also charge a bit extra for the time when they have not enough work to do.
> 
> The people I'm talking about don't want to sustain a business.
> They're in contract work because they can't find permanent employment,
> not because they can do better (in some way) as self-employed than as
> employees.

I mean here sutain as in "being able to live of it more than 3-6 months".
And that's what most people here do if they face the problem of unemployment
and see the oppurtunity of doing contract work. They form a "company"
(which is in its most basic form as easy as saying "i'm a company") and
let hire themselves. But even then, they try to get at least the most basic
insurances paid.
 
>  > This makes them about as expensive or often even more expensive then
>  > normal employees. The only benefit left is that you can hire them
>  > when you need them and let go afterwards. But in a country where people
>  > value stability and count hire-and-fire as inhumane and a busness practice
>  > that no moral man would use, people rather like to hire empolyees than
>  > contractors.
> 
> And when business goes bad, they stop hiring employees, and only
> partially compensate with increase in contract work.  This is bad for
> everybody.

I don't exactly see how you come to that conclusion. If business goes
bad, a normal company here would try to minimize wasting money as much
as possible, probably stop hiring new people in order not to be forced
to lay off the ones that they already have at some later point.
>From the employees point of view this gives him a lot of security, as
he will not be forced to look for a new job in an economy with potentially
many job seekers and few jobs.

>  > > Japan does have a lot of such friction, more on the side of new
>  > > graduates (who have a fourth option sometimes taken: suicide) than on
>  > > the side of companies which quite happily (until recently when they
>  > > started getting seriously bashed for it) used contract workers.  
>  > 
>  > I often hear weird and contradicting stories about job oppurtunities,
>  > hiring procedures and first jobs of graduates in Japan. How does
>  > it really look like?
> 
> Right now?  I'd guess it accounts for 20% of the record high suicide
> rate, and about 50% of the famous decline in Japanese competitive
> advantage as everybody with half a brain tries to get a secure job
> either in a large private bureaucracy or in a government bureaucracy
> rather than take the risk of doing something productive or creative.
> Does that provide a clue?

Uhmm.. once upon a time, i tried to look for a PhD position in Japan
(one of the few countries that did research in the field that interested me).
But i gave up when i realized that the students were mostly meant to try
and implement the idea someone else had, instead of trying their own ideas.
Having seen the academia in Europe, i was quite surprised and wondered
how Japanese universities could stay competitive to the rest of the world.

[Description of Japanese student hiring process]

Uff..That explains a lot! I couldn't imagine to work in an economy
that would force me into such a corset. I very much like the freedom
here to start and leave jobs when ever one likes to. Especially not
being bound to have a job right after graduation.

> I don't know much about first jobs; my understanding is that new
> graduates employed in general management are not expected to know
> anything useful, and aren't expected to be productive at all for about
> a year.

Same here. Someone who just got a degree is only expected to have a
basic knowledge, some knowledge in special field, to be a quick learner
and being able to adapt. Everything else is thaught on the job.
Depending how well your degree matches your job, you are "unproductive"
for anything between 3 months and a year.

> They spend that time in formal training of various kinds, and

Only very few, and mostly just the larger companies here have
formal training for fresh-graduates.

> as gofers for more senior employees until they've started to learn the
> ropes.  After that first year expectations rise quite rapidly AIUI.
> But that could be completely wrong, it's all second-hand.

That is defintily a japanese thing. Hardly anyone here with a degree
of any kind would let him use as a gofer. And be it just for a short
period. On the other hand, i did my internship in Japan and did nothing
of that kind. Although the first week i was just set at a desk and told
to busy myself, as the group was busy with a release, the rest of the time
i was given some quite big engineering taks (though nothing of
vital importance).


>  > > But I can't see it as a solution to introduce more European-style
>  > > rules to create further barriers to hiring here.
>  > 
>  > Which rules/barriers are you refering to?
> 
> Required social insurance, difficulty in firing, restrictions on
> working hours, mandatory paid vacation, etc.

Please do not put whole Europe into the same basket regarding this.
The laws and regulations vary quite heavily among countries.

Here in Switzerland for one, the regulations are quite lax. A company
has to pay part of the insurance (the other part is paid by the employee),
but it is not that much that would make people more expensive than anywhere
else in the world (what makes them expensive are the living costs).
Also, the companies are allowed to lay off anyone they dont want. They
have to write a letter of recomendation and have to pay the salary
for at least 3 months (the employment continues during that time, even
if the empolyee is fired "on the spot"). It is basically a compromise
between the need of flexibility for the employer and the security
for the employee. And i have the impression that it's not that bad, at
least i've not heard any of the companies blame the insurances or any
other regulations for their problems. (Quite contrary to Germany, where
in some sectors there are hardly any regular employees, because the
company cannot lay them off anymore. Hence most people are just 
limited time contractors)


				Attila Kinali
-- 
If you want to walk fast, walk alone.
If you want to walk far, walk together.
		-- African proverb