Recuitment professionals just can't fill some jobs and sometimes it's your fault for wanting too much money. So says Tenille Emmett, Head of Talent2's ICT Practice in Victoria, who told The Register “The jobs that are most challenging to fill at the moment are ones that require niche technical skill sets such as: Oracle Fusion, …
Maybe outsource to the UK?
That'll be the day...
I look forward to the day I read a headline reading
"CEO slots can't be filled due to the demands for outrageous, greedy compensation packages"
Nah, never gonna happen...
Try fantasy land!
Recruiters will not even consider people with less than five years experience in these skills, even if the technology has not been around for five years.
Anyone with more that five years experience in iPhone development either works at Apple or now owns a solid-gold house.
Poor little corporations!
They don't see any problem blackmailing prospective employees into accepting ridiculously low wages whenever they can use the supply/demand argument, and yet they whine when it's the other way around.
Oh well, if they don't want to pay that much it surely means they don't need those skills after all...
Re: Poor little corporations!
More like they want to look like they are trying to hire someone, but just can't seem to find that someone.
Oh dear, we will have to bring someone in from over seas. Nothing to do with them being willing to work for peanuts.
Re: Poor little corporations!
Same thing Sony said before they fired their "overpaid" IT security staff and got hacked from what I heard LOL
Me thinks Tenille doesn't understand basic Economics. If everyone with the skills is asking for too much money then it is likely that the end client is just not willing to pay the market rate. If these people aren't unemployed and their rate demand can therefore stay high then chances are you're just looking in the wrong pay bracket. Back to school for you miss.
You want my skills, you pay my price. My price will go down if nobody is willing to pay me. If they are, chances are you're trying to get scarce, valuable skills at a low-ball figure.
Your alternative, and I know this is unheard of in business these days, is to take a current employee with a related skill set and offer them training. Then everyone wins. Of course the problem here is that if you're not paying them market rate then they'll leave afterwards too.
So basically, stop being a cheapskate, or if the money really isn't there to pay for these skills then you're going to have to live without them.
It's the stupid interviewers who say "...and how much do you want to be paid?"
No, it's "this is how much the job pays, do you want it?"
I have found the opposite to be true.
I have been on both sides of the table over the years: as the interviewer and as the applicant. I've also done consulting contract negotiation on both sides of the table.
I believe the party who makes the first bid is at a disadvantage. If you are hiring and you bid first, the applicant will almost always ask for ~5% more. However, if you get them to bid first you may find their number was 25% less than you were prepared to pay. This results in significant savings and gives you budget room for granting future raises to keep the employee happy. Same general principle applies to consulting contract negotiations.
As always, there is a possibility that the parties can't come to terms if expectations don't overlap, but that's ubiquitous in negotiation.
They want people to look at problems "holistically" and are not tied to a single vendor. That means you're going to need people with years of experience in several technologies. No wonder such people are expensive.
One of the good things about it is that the sheer amount of experience required serves to combat (a little) the tendency towards young graduates with less experience.
It also enables the individual to get off the hamster wheel of non-stop certification courses, since it's only the concepts and fundamentals that are required.