Today’s headline about the drop in the newly unemployed is good, I guess.  I tend to look at this cynically….after all, we’re boasting about how few jobs were lost, yet the number is not small at all.  I guess it’s all relative.

But herein gives me a chance to point you in the direction of one of my favorite statistics:   Unemployment By Educational Attainment.

You’re smart, so I won’t interpret this data for you, but I will highlight what is most interesting to me:  Unemployment among those with a Bachelor’s Degree or higher is at a mere 4.9% (Nov. ‘09).  Show this stuff to any aimless students in your household; Perhaps it will provide some motivation.

I have been doing a lot of reading lately – some of which, admittedly, is several years old – on the fact that there is a pending significant skilled worker shortage here in the U.S.  No one dares write about this topic now, amidst high unemployment, but the current circumstances are merely distracting us from the truth:  We in the U.S. are not producing the highly skilled workforce, in labor or the professional sciences, which can meet the demands of a normally functioning economy.

At this very moment, several industries are facing a dire skilled workforce shortage.  These industries include healthcare, skilled manufacturing, and engineering.  Yes, I said engineering.  You and I both know that this is a very broad brush stroke, but that’s beside the point.  I can tell you that, in my own experience and from speaking with many collaborators, there is a supply void for engineers in all facets of mass transit, water resources, and energy/renewables/sustainability (According to Manpower’s 2009 Talent Shortage Report , only 19% of companies indicated that they had trouble filling positions in 2009. The #1 recruiting trouble spot? Engineers).  When it comes to infrastructure, there may be a good supply of engineers who know how things have been done, but there is a shortage of those who can meaningfully contribute to the way we will move, drink, power up and live in the 21^st century.  To paraphrase a now defunct automaker, this is not your father’s infrastructure.

Not everyone agrees with the panicky warnings of the skilled worker gap, but all agree that the skills needed to meet the challenges of a modern market are different from those of the past, therefore creating great challenges in certain niches – even amidst “The Great Recession.”

Here are some of the trends which are said to predicate a massive skilled worker shortage within the next five to ten years:

1. Demographics. Baby Boomers are making up a large number of the senior ranks right now, and although they don’t seem to be going anywhere at this moment, when they do decide to stop working, there are fewer workers in the generation succeeding them to fill their shoes.   Apparently, the boomers were so busy working and enjoying their relative wealth, they didn’t see fit to make a lot of babies (also an issue in funding social security).  So, in summary, you have people leaving the workforce in greater number than the U.S. has replacements for them.  This part of the crisis doesn’t even require job growth, since it is all about maintenance of productivity.
2. And speaking of productivity, I have something to share which will be mildly scandalous to my Gen-X peers: When baby boomers do need to be replaced, it is suggested that they will need to be replaced by more than a single worker. Why?  Baby Boomers are renowned “workaholics,” yet their succeeding generation is more likely to hold sacred a “work-life balance” by placing a greater emphasis on home and family.  As such, they are less likely to give up leisure and personal time to the organization on a day-in, day-out basis.  Some scholars (such as those referenced) think this means we of the Gen-X crowd are less productive.
3. Lack of Emphasis in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) subjects in education systems throughout the nation. I, personally, think this is a cultural issue and the problem in offering courses of study is a result of the laws of supply and demand.  I believe if communities work collaboratively to place greater emphasis and value upon the sciences, then bright young minds will gravitate in that direction. My hypothesis is based on empirical evidence only, including the fact that I know way too many chemists from Boston (what did Boston do to make this happen?) and the observation that many STEM students are foreign nationals.  (As a solution, my husband recommends mandatory class field trips to the wastewater treatment plant or the county landfill.  I think it’s a good idea, and a great eye-opener. )
4. Limitations on Immigration and Work Authorization will drain the U.S. of much of its STEM talent: Security issues leading to more stringent immigration policies may choke off the supply of foreign nationals who come to the US to study in the STEM disciplines;  Or these students who attend U.S. universities, will unsuccessfully seek work visa status, and have no choice but to return to their home countries to apply their newly-minted knowledge.

I would like to hear from everyone on this topic, but especially corporate recruitment departments and managers everywhere.  Do you subscribe to prognostications of a dire worker shortage on the horizon?  What are you doing to get ready for the crunch?

If you missed the part about WHY we need a new means for funding the maintenance and growth of our transportation infrastructure, then let’s recap:  

First, the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), which pays for much of our roadway development, is depleted.  At the same time, the revenue to the HTF from gasoline taxes – already not enough – only promises to decline as fuel efficiency increases.   Concurrently, much our infrastructure is at a critical juncture in it’s life cycle — in need of major repair or a complete rebuild.

It’s the perfect storm:  Less money when more is sorely needed.

So, how do we raise more money for the work which needs to be done?  Here are some scenarios swirling around policy war rooms today:

• Reconfigure the gas tax to an ad valorem tax: Setting the gasoline tax as a percentage of fuel purchase instead of a flat, cents per gallon tax would be a better way to index revenue to road use and inflation. However, this idea presents a future conflict of interest to a nation which seeks to incentivize sustainable energy solutions and reduce its dependence on oil.  How can we justify funding mobility from the sale of fossil fuels?
• Toll roads: This classic model will have a new spin in that your toll road might be leased to a private company that has been selected to operate and maintain the road for a specific number of years.  They will recoup their operating costs through tolls to the user, and will be responsible for upkeep and performance as well as all services provided on the facility.  In some cases, the investor will also design, build, operate and maintain the roadway, for which they will be awarded a much longer lease (we’re talking greater than 50 years).  In the business we call this Public-Private Partnership, PPP, or P3, and it’s already a successful model in many U.S. states.
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): Given the advent of more fuel efficient vehicles, this idea is meant to recapture monies lost in gasoline sales.   It seems to be a more effective use tax, since it is fairly applied by actual miles driven than by gasoline consumed, and may be a better behavioral incentive for eliminating trips, combining trips, or exercising mode choice.  Since mileage tax is collected by the states, this proposal gets sticky when drivers cross state lines, but I am certain since I’ve last read up on the topic that they have come up with a solution to this problem.  (Anyone?)

In the United States, one can expect that in the future there will be a more direct correlation between transportation mode of choice and individual burden/cost.  This means there will be a different and very direct price to fly, drive, bus, rail or bike it.  The user will certainly weigh this price against available time and budget, then make choices accordingly.  The biggest change will be in the cost to drive…and it may change the way you move forever.

How do you believe these hypothetical changes will affect your own travel behavior?  What cultural/societal shifts do you predict will occur as a result of such changes?

Special Thanks to Contributing Researcher & Writer Crystal Pendergrass, civil engineer/jobseeker, and to Contributing Editor, Donald Galligan, AICP, all around nice guy.

Yes, there is a formula to allocate funds by state based upon a) gas tax revenues contributed, b) miles of highway and c) population, but — like the tax code — there are loopholes and exceptions. 

First, it is important to know that HTF monies are not given away with zero commitment at the state level.  For each project, there is a required state match (how the match is raised varies from state to state).  Typically, the match for capital projects or purchases is 80/20, with 20% being the state obligation.  Therefore, generally speaking, the 18.4¢ per gallon that each driver pays into the fund is matched at the state level by approximately 3.7¢.

Since 1983, 2.86 cents of each gallon’s tax is reserved for the Mass Transit account.  With a 20% match by the state, this amount becomes to 3.43 cents per gallon.  However, by law this is only to be used on capital expenditures…i.e., buying buses and other equipment.  The match is actually 50/50 when it comes to transit operations. 

So, buying buses and rolling stock is possible, but finding the money to put them to use is very difficult, and must be hobbled together from many sources.  Unless a locality makes transit a priority, the lack of funding to operate the system keeps it small and, as a result, less convenient than jumping in the car.

(By now, you know where this is going, and it might get me flamed on these pages for being mode-biased.  I will state here and now that I like and need my car; I just wish I had more choices available to suit my destinations and my schedule.  I would surely excercise those choices!)

Meanwhile, when it comes to highway funding match, all states are not treated equally.  States with a large amount of Federal land (which accounts for a lot of states west of the Mississippi), are awarded HTF money on a sliding scale.  The sliding scale decreases the local match requirement for highway projects, but does not do the same for transit. 

In Idaho, for example, the local match requirement for highway projects is only 7.34 %, but it is still 20% for transit capital, and 50% for transit operations, resulting in a built in bias toward roads.  Why would a region chose to augment alternative modes of transportation when they can build roads at a fraction of the cost (to their own budget)?

Obviously, the HTF is in crisis;  I am not suggesting that transit needs a bigger part of that pie…the 15.54 cents per gallon that funds roadway projects has to cover a lot of ground (see page 11 in the link).  The solutions to our problems lie not only in the ways that we spend money on transportation projects, but also in the ways we raise that money.  We will explore the latter issue in a forthcoming post.

Special Thanks to Contributing Writer and Editor, Donald Galligan, AICP, Transportation Planner and all around nice guy.

“Job Seeker” is a difficult role to play involuntarily, but it is a job, and it needs to be treated like one.  My advice to all job seekers, regardless of industry, is the same:  Get out from behind the computer. 

There was a time when looking for a job online was the “new wave” of the job search.   That was in the mid-90s for those who missed it.  I know, because I was a greenback, un-networked, recruiter at the time and I used online resources to help me identify candidates I had no other way of sourcing.   In the infancy of the Internet, places like CareerMosaic and Monster.com were cutting-edge, early adopter territory which allowed companies and search consultants like me to reach way beyond the limits of the traditional tools of the time.   Likewise, it was the savvy job seeker who hit these portals and found themselves plucked like cherries into rewarding career baskets.  Quality was high, volume was (relatively) low. 

As the ‘Net has matured, job boards have proliferated.  There are TENS of THOUSANDS of them.   This level of maturity in the market makes it hard for companies to decide where to spend their dollars and even harder for prospective employees to determine where they can best be “found.”   

But, I am not here to bash job boards, because they should play an important role in every firm’s recruiting efforts.  It’s in this particular market, in today’s context, where I must tell candidates to avoid job-board dependency. 

I know it feels good at the end of the day to say you have “sent out ten resumes and cover letters.”   Only the magic of the Internet can allow you that level of productivity.  However, despite auto-responders and other types of electronic communication that some companies try to put in place acknowledging an applicant’s efforts (most don’t even bother), the anonymity of the internet is killing your morale in so many other ways. 

As a Job Seeker, you have zero control after you hit “Submit” … You don’t know the timeline, you don’t know much about the job and you don’t know if anyone has even looked at your inquiry.  Of ten resumes – was even ONE seen by a decision making body?  The chances are slim.    

So here are three things you should do to exercise real control in your job search:

1. Get Involved:  If you haven’t yet, start your commitment to your profession by signing up to participate in your industry associations.  Don’t just go to meetings, join committees, and volunteer your (currently ample) time.  Be active and involved in your profession even when you’re not drawing a paycheck.
2. Professional Development: Sign up for as much professional development as you can possibly afford.  Since you’re not “learning from experience” during this period, learn from a teacher.  Demonstrate that you’re taking responsibility for your own professional advancement.
3. Become Active in Your Larger Community, in business and at home: Take an active role in issues which speak to your passions, whether they are focused at a community or regional level.

This is not rocket science; you know this is what you should be doing.  However, it’s not WHAT you do; it’s HOW you do it. 

Here’s the real key:  Don’t make the mistake of getting out from behind the computer and doing the same things you do when you’re sitting in that chair….searching for jobs.  If you attend all of these events and pass out resumes and introduce yourself as Jerry or Jane Job Seeker, the conversation will automatically focus on what you don’t bring to the table:  a paying job, or status as a collaborator. 

Instead, get involved with the whole purpose of giving what you have to offer to others.  Make Social Deposits, Not Withdrawals.  Find out with every contact, what someone else is trying to achieve, and how you can help them in their pursuits.  Some examples somewhat specific to my industries….

• Perhaps you know someone at the agency who can help get that permit out of review purgatory? 
• Perhaps you know of a DBE/WBE which might make an excellent teaming partner in pursuit of a competitive bid?   
• Perhaps you, during your networking at other events/meetings, will meet someone who is a perfect fit for a job in which you yourself may not be qualified? 
• Perhaps you have the time to research the answer to that question your busy contact is contemplating.

Your mantra should be to keep your eyes and mind open and be **ridiculously** generous with your time and connections. 

This may not land you an immediate job; you can still go home and hit the job boards.  However, circulating in the flesh and blood with a genuine mission to create value (as opposed to simply serving your own needs) is an activity which will emblazon you upon the minds of people who will be anxious to return the favor one day. 

What you will gain from following a plan based on these principals is a solid network of relationships…and you’ll all have each others’ backs for years to come.   Hitting the “Enter” key twenty-two times a day will never come close.

Where does the money to build and fix roads come from?  Since 1956, U.S. roadway infrastructure projects have been largely funded by the Highway Trust Fund (HTF).  Money is pooled into the HTF via an 18.4 cents per gallon gasoline tax (24.4 cents on diesel).  Other sources of income include taxes on tires, and the sale of heavy trucks and trailers.   Once collected, these revenues are placed in a dedicated account, The Highway Trust Fund.  Monies from the HTF are then re-distributed to individual states according to a formula based upon linear highway miles, population, and the amount of gas tax revenues originally contributed by the state to the HTF. ¥

This is all fine and dandy, but is it sustainable?  The answer has proven to be “No.”

In recent years, a confluence of factors has led to an emergency-level shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund.  These factors, while not in and of themselves bad, are individually daunting and collectively catastrophic to our antiquated funding mechanisms.  They include:

• high gas prices which have forced motorists to drive less,
• popularity of cars that get better gas mileage,
• the emergence of alternative fuels,
• the federal portion of the gasoline tax has not changed since 1993
• the rising expense of road maintenance, materials and construction

It is difficult to argue that this 50-year-old funding mechanism anchored in a time of cheap land, labor and materials is adequate to satisfy the needs of a modern nation.   In my next post, I’ll address a number of alternative proposals which are swirling about for replacing/upgrading our transportation infrastructure funding mechanisms.

(¥ Wow…does anyone else see how this promotes an SUV culture and ever more asphalt?)

Special Thanks to Contributing Researcher & Writer Crystal Pendergrass, civil engineer/jobseeker, and to Contributing Editor, Donald Galligan, AICP, Transportation Planner all around nice guy.

• One-third of the nation’s highways – interstates, freeways and major roads – are in poor or mediocre condition.
• More than one-quarter of major urban roads, which carry the brunt of national traffic, are in poor condition.

To surmise: Our roads and bridges are falling apart, just like my nearly 90 year-old house.  And like my house, maintenance costs are going up.  But wait – it’s worse than that.  As the roads deteriorate, our dependency upon them is increasing due to population growth and trends to dispersion (i.e. suburban living).  This heavy use means serious maintenance is in order; and, coupled with a demand for more roads, our auto-centric lifestyles are quickly outstripping the funds available to keep us moving in our personal, four-wheeled castles.

Take a look at the American Society of Civil Engineering’s 2009 Infrastructure Report Card, where the nations’ infrastructure receives an overall grade of “D.”  Do these films describe an economic powerhouse or the dilapidated third world?  Is this not perceived as a crisis to the general population because we can’t see or feel the problem unless we experience a failure?  (P.S. intolerable traffic = failure.)

ASCE Film Credits

Special Thanks to Contributing Researcher & Writer Crystal Pendergrass, civil engineer/job seeker, and to Contributing Editor, Donald Galligan, AICP, Transportation Planner and all around nice guy.

However, there are a lot of individuals who are willing to look at a new opportunity. Why? The simple answer is “insurance.“ There are some really great people in our market who find themselves in a situation for which they have no recent benchmark: light backlog, delay of contract execution due to funding difficulties, watching peers lose their jobs, etc. These individuals are more receptive than ever to investigating opportunities, but that doesn’t mean when the dialogue culminates that they are willing to go anywhere.  

What is your firm doing to make sure they won’t?