Recruitment That Works

Creating recruitment programs that lower costs and get results.

That's what this blog is all about.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

U.S. college grads shun Wall Street for Washington

U.S. college grads shun Wall Street for Washington
11 Jun 2009 12:03:20 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Wendell Marsh

WASHINGTON, June 11 (Reuters) - Wall Street may be losing its luster for new U.S. college graduates who are increasingly looking to the government for jobs that enrich their social conscience, if not their wallet.

In the boom years, New York's financial center lured many of the brightest young stars with the promise of high salaries and bonuses. But the financial crisis has tainted the image of big banks, and with fewer financial jobs available, Uncle Sam may be reaping the benefit.

"Some grads might have seen two of their older siblings go through the dot-com crash and the emptiness of that, and now the Wall Street crash, just chasing after the big bucks," said John Challenger, chief executive of job placement company Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Some of the appeal of Washington simply reflects the grim reality of graduating in the midst of the worst recession in decades. The U.S. unemployment rate jumped to 9.4 percent in May, which means new graduates are competing with a large pool of older unemployed workers for a limited supply of jobs.

A report from the National Association of Colleges and Employers projected a 21.6 percent decrease in new hires among college graduates. Almost every sector was hit, with banking taking the biggest blow, dropping 70.9 percent.

"Students don't see the private sector as being as viable this year," said Edwin Koc, director of strategic and foundation research for the Pennsylvania-based NACE.

Of the roughly 1.6 million students who recently graduated from college, only 19.7 percent had secured jobs upon graduation in May, according to NACE's 2009 student survey.

But Labor Department data shows employment in the Washington area has increased since early 2008, even as other regions have lost jobs.

"D.C. is the only place where we can point to that is actually adding jobs right now, and we also know that the government is hiring thousands of people to oversee both the (economic) stimulus package and all the associated projects," said Marisa Di Natale, Senior Economist for Moody's Economy.com.

GIVE BACK

Challenger said the excitement surrounding the election of President Barack Obama, who enjoyed huge support on college campuses, was also attracting young graduates to government and government-service contractors.

Britini Wilcher is one of them. Wilcher, a recent graduate from Spelman College in Atlanta, spent two summers as an intern for Merrill Lynch, which was hard hit by the financial crisis and taken over by Bank of America Corp last year.

When it came time to look for full-time employment, Wilcher wanted to do something with a bigger social impact.

The California native will be working in Washington for a government consulting firm where she will specialize in economic development.

"It's becoming trendy to take your community into your hands and give back, which is a good thing," Wilcher said. "People are empowered by the current political climate."

The shift in attitudes is also apparent in graduate school enrollment. At Morehouse College, more graduates are opting to study public policy, said Douglas Cooper, director of career services at the college's division of business and economics.

That is a big change for Morehouse, which has a long history of sending its students on to Wall Street, thanks in part to a relationship solidified by former college president and current Bank of America Chairman Walter Massey.

"Clearly, students who have historically planned on making a beeline to Wall Street have rethought that or are rethinking that," Cooper said.

The share of Morehouse business students going into finance has decreased to 37.5 percent this year from 44 percent a year earlier, while the number of students going on to graduate school has almost doubled.

Most students who continue to graduate school this year are planning to go into government-related fields, Cooper said.

Some think the shift will have longer-term consequences in employment trends as the baby boomer generation approaches retirement, opening up career paths in government and service.
"You may see a whole generation of some of the very best students that decide to do public service rather than business," Challenger said.

(Reporting by Wendell Marsh; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Houston Community College Launches Job Partnership Program

Houston Community College's "Partners for Jobs" is a collaboration of interested organizations helping Houstonians get an education or training and identify job opportunities. Members of the corporate community assisting HCC in this effort include: MITTONMedia; Employment Expert Rick Gillis; Jobs Ministry Southwest; Waste Management; HR Houston; Greater Houston Business Partnership; HoustonJobs.com; Workforce Solutions, Houston Chronicle and Comcast.

Learn more about the program by going to http://www.hccpartnersforjobs.org/. To watch part of the press conference launch with Houston Mayor Bill White, click on this link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AkxKkS04tk


And remember, "A great job is only an education away."

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The Media Fall for Phony 'Jobs' Claims: The Obama Numbers Are Pure Fiction.

There are many sides in today's debate about job gains or losses in this economy. Wanting to present all sides, here is an article from today's WSJ:

By WILLIAM MCGURN/WSJ/June 9, 2009

Tony Fratto is envious.

Mr. Fratto was a colleague of mine in the Bush administration, and as a senior member of the White House communications shop, he knows just how difficult it can be to deal with a press corps skeptical about presidential economic claims. It now appears, however, that Mr. Fratto's problem was that he simply lacked the magic words -- jobs "saved or created."

"Saved or created" has become the signature phrase for Barack Obama as he describes what his stimulus is doing for American jobs. His latest invocation came yesterday, when the president declared that the stimulus had already saved or created at least 150,000 American jobs -- and announced he was ramping up some of the stimulus spending so he could "save or create" an additional 600,000 jobs this summer. These numbers come in the context of an earlier Obama promise that his recovery plan will "save or create three to four million jobs over the next two years."

The president should 'save or create' more jobs in Cleveland.

Mr. Fratto sees a double standard at play. "We would never have used a formula like 'save or create,'" he tells me. "To begin with, the number is pure fiction -- the administration has no way to measure how many jobs are actually being 'saved.' And if we had tried to use something this flimsy, the press would never have let us get away with it."

Of course, the inability to measure Mr. Obama's jobs formula is part of its attraction. Never mind that no one -- not the Labor Department, not the Treasury, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- actually measures "jobs saved." As the New York Times delicately reports, Mr. Obama's jobs claims are "based on macroeconomic estimates, not an actual counting of jobs." Nice work if you can get away with it.

And get away with it he has. However dubious it may be as an economic measure, as a political formula "save or create" allows the president to invoke numbers that convey an illusion of precision. Harvard economist and former Bush economic adviser Greg Mankiw calls it a "non-measurable metric." And on his blog, he acknowledges the political attraction.

"The expression 'create or save,' which has been used regularly by the President and his economic team, is an act of political genius," writes Mr. Mankiw. "You can measure how many jobs are created between two points in time. But there is no way to measure how many jobs are saved. Even if things get much, much worse, the President can say that there would have been 4 million fewer jobs without the stimulus."

Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%.

It's not only former Bush staffers such as Messrs. Fratto and Mankiw who have noted the political convenience here. During a March hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, Chairman Max Baucus challenged Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on the formula.

"You created a situation where you cannot be wrong," said the Montana Democrat. "If the economy loses two million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would've lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs. You've given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct."

Now, something's wrong when the president invokes a formula that makes it impossible for him to be wrong and it goes largely unchallenged. It's true that almost any government spending will create some jobs and save others. But as Milton Friedman once pointed out, that doesn't tell you much: The government, after all, can create jobs by hiring people to dig holes and fill them in.
If the "saved or created" formula looks brilliant, it's only because Mr. Obama and his team are not being called on their claims. And don't expect much to change. So long as the news continues to repeat the administration's line that the stimulus has already "saved or created" 150,000 jobs over a time period when the U.S. economy suffered an overall job loss 10 times that number, the White House would be insane to give up a formula that allows them to spin job losses into jobs saved.

"You would think that any self-respecting White House press corps would show some of the same skepticism toward President Obama's jobs claims that they did toward President Bush's tax cuts," says Mr. Fratto. "But I'm still waiting."

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Microsoft to move jobs overseas if Obama tax plan goes through

This recent article by Ryan J. Donmoyer, of Bloomberg, addresses interesting dilemma: how do you grow companies and create jobs if corporate tax structure drives companies abroad?

"By Ryan J. Donmoyer, June 3 (Bloomberg) -- Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer Steven Ballmer said the world’s largest software company would move some employees offshore if Congress enacts President Barack Obama’s plans to impose higher taxes on U.S. companies’ foreign profits.

“It makes U.S. jobs more expensive,” Ballmer said in an interview. “We’re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S. as opposed to keeping them inside the U.S.”
Obama on May 4 proposed outlawing or restricting about $190 billion in tax breaks for offshore companies over the next decade. Such business groups as the National Foreign Trade Council, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable have denounced the proposed overhaul.

U.S. tax rules let companies defer paying corporate rates as high as 35 percent on most types of foreign profits as long as that money remains invested overseas. Obama says he wants to end such incentives to keep foreign profits tax-deferred so that companies would invest them in the U.S.

Microsoft reported an overall effective tax rate of 26 percent for 2008 in its last annual report. “Our effective tax rates are less than the statutory tax rate due to foreign earnings taxed at lower rates,” the report said.

Barry Bosworth, an economist in Washington at the Brookings Institution research center, said many software companies such as Microsoft have exploited tax and trade rules in the U.S. and other countries to achieve a low overall tax rate.

Ireland Subsidiary

Typically, he said, a company like Microsoft develops a product like Windows in the United States and deducts those costs against U.S. income. It then transfers the technology to a subsidiary in Ireland, where corporate tax rates are lower, without charging licensing fees. The company then assigns its foreign sales to the Irish subsidiary so it doesn’t have to claim the income in the United States.

“What Microsoft wants to do is deduct the cost at a high tax rate and report the profits at a low tax rate,” Bosworth said. “Relative to where they are now, the administration’s proposals are less favorable, so there will be some rebalancing on their part.”

Ballmer is one of 10 U.S. software company executives pushing back against the tax proposals in meetings today with White House officials including Jason Furman, deputy director of the National Economic Council, and the heads of congressional committees such as House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat.

Expense Deductions

Among other things, Obama proposed limiting expense deductions such as those for employee compensation when companies defer U.S. tax on foreign profits.

In a roundtable discussion today, Ballmer, Symantec Corp. Chairman John Thompson and the heads of smaller companies such as privately held Bentley Systems, an Exton, Pennsylvania-based maker of engineering software, said such policies would hurt domestic investment, reduce shareholder value and increase the cost of employing U.S. workers.

Ballmer said that, while the Obama proposals would preserve expense deductions related to research and experimentation costs, the overall deduction limits for companies that defer tax on foreign profits would raise the cost of employing U.S. workers. Fiduciary responsibility to shareholders would require Microsoft to cut costs, he said, meaning many jobs would be moved out of the country.

Worldwide Employees

Microsoft employed 95,029 people worldwide as of April 21, of whom 56,552 were based in the United States, according to the company’s Web site. The company announced it was firing up to 5,000 people in January while hiring some new workers; the company has shed about 1,000 jobs since then, spokesman Lou Gellos said.

Ballmer estimated that higher taxes under the proposal would reduce profits for companies that comprise the Dow Jones Industrial Average by between 10 and 15 percentage points.
“It’s just a question of how much will the Dow come down,” Ballmer said. “It’s not about companies anyway; we’re talking about shareholders.”

In addition to limiting current deductions for companies that defer U.S. tax on their foreign profits, Obama proposed altering a set of rules known as “check the box” that allow companies to shelter foreign profits in offshore subsidiaries that can be disregarded for U.S. tax purposes.
Duck Liabilities

While the rules were designed in 1997 to protect U.S. companies from paying excessive tax to other governments, Obama administration officials say it has evolved into a way to duck U.S. liabilities. Altering the rule, which Obama dubbed a “loophole,” would generate $86.5 billion in new revenue by 2019, the administration says.

The third international tax proposal would change rules governing how companies can claim tax credits for levies paid to foreign governments. Officials say some companies abuse the rule to accelerate tax credits before they could otherwise be claimed.

Obama has said his proposals would protect or create jobs in the United States.
Thompson of Symantec, the Cupertino, California-based maker of Norton anti-virus software and similar tools, said software companies are frustrated by being called tax cheats and compared with companies that moved their headquarters to low-tax countries such as Bermuda.
‘Counterintuitive’

Thompson called the Obama proposals “counterintuitive” to the administration’s other stated goals of fostering an innovation-oriented economy.

“It is a little bit ironic that most of our most significant trading partners and partners globally have taken the tack that they’ll reduce corporate tax rates to stimulate economic growth and not raise corporate tax rates,” Thompson said."