Re:Analyzing the monetary component of employee benefits at ...
by Cthulhu_ on Thursday March 30, 2017 @09:49AM
(#13995300)
This is mostly anecdotal, but I don't know anyone outside the SF bubble that has a good, stable job they're happy with and who I see working there for more than a decade. It's all entry-level jobs these days. Can't make a career out of that.
Re:Analyzing the monetary component of employee benefits at ...
by tastythrowaway2 on Friday March 31, 2017 @12:09AM
(#14001110)
Respectfully, I think that's an unrealistically high standard to set. Having a job that is stable and engaging with long term potential is an exceedingly rare find for any generation. And entry-level jobs are how you make your career - you work your way up.
Re:Analyzing the monetary component of employee benefits at ...
by autokad on Thursday March 30, 2017 @09:49AM
(#13995295)
> "I'm starting to suspect the reason just might be that the new generation doesn't actually have any fucking money or stable jobs. Just a theory."
possibly in other contexts, but obviously not in this one. if what the article states is true, they are paid pretty well at these companies, but seemingly at the cost of no matching retirement plans.
I see a version of this statement all the time from us old people, sometimes it ends with "purchasing homes" or "full time long term careers at one company" say, or "retirement saving" as in your example.
I'm starting to suspect the reason just might be that the new generation doesn't actually have any fucking money or stable jobs. Just a theory.