[WarOnPrivacy]

industry only ever seems to want to hire people with the word Senior in their title. They almost never want to create people with the word Senior in their title.

I suggest that the first ladder that got pulled up is the one on the ground.

No one wants to train new entrants to the field. Not training junior workers seems like a natural extension to that.

[teeray]

It’s a Volunteer’s Dilemma: why train juniors when you can hire the juniors other companies trained to become seniors?

[zanecodes]

Maybe companies should provide some sort of incentive for the juniors they trained to stay with them. As it is, the obvious and rational choice is always to leave for another company that will pay you 25% more whenever you feel undervalued.

[mattpara]

I think pensions used to be that incentive.

[ta1243]

In centuries past apprentices would pay their junior positions, in time picking up paid work as the progressed to senior, then eventually taking on apprentices of their own (and be paid)

[whatshisface]

I guess universities will eventually backfill that gap with training that focuses on senior skills. Eventually.

[thmsths]

We already require juniors to go through a 4 years university degree. It takes a fair bit of time of real world work to get to the senior level. So unless we expect people to do another 5 years of schooling, I am not sure how this will happen (and even in that scenario I believe there is a difference between hands on, on the job experience and classroom experience).

[jdee]

it happened with architecture degrees in the uk. it went from 3 years to 7 years, as the skill levels and implicit knowledge required increased over time.