Plenty of people working helpdesk that know a bit of python who can learn COBOL if they knew a job offer was on the other end of the investment in learning the language. There are hoards of people learning python and powershell just so they can make more money, trust me when I say they (the people I see learning python for career prospects) have no sentimental attachment to the language.

I don't think it's learning COBOL language that's the hard part. An inexperienced programmer who hasn't worked on financial systems is going to make security mistakes and write buggy code for awhile, both of which can be deadly to a bank. But it would be better to have that person rewrite the infrastructure than try to fix bugs. The problem with these ancient systems is trying to understand how bugs arise from subtle unintended interactions within millions of lines of code. I've been coding many languages for 25 years and I would consider it extremely daunting to try to tackle a bank bug knowing that one wrong assumption about one line of code could crash whole systems or cost millions of dollars.

Eh, someone's got to do it. Letting thing stagnate in perpetuity isn't cheap either. Move slowly and write tests.

Sure, but a veteran coder at least understands that tampering with something may affect some other subsystem you don't even know exists until it breaks... which you wouldn't even think to test. The idea of throwing the phone staff into COBOL instead of them learning Python just obfuscates the real problem which isn't that the language is uncool and dying but that the systems are like the rules of the NFL. They stopped making sense a long time ago to anyone who wasn't immersed and paying attention.

Ah, yeah, fully agree - I just saw your mention of having 25 years experience, which made me think basically "if not you, then who?"

I didn’t intend to imply that the problem could be solved by an army of people fresh out of boot camps with no senior level supervision.

I'm also realizing now that just because you "would consider it extremely daunting" does not necessarily mean that you don't think you could be a net positive contributor.

Fwiw, one of the highest paid coders I ever knew worked for a big stuffy bank. He was unfireable because he was the only one that knew the internal systems as well as he did. Learning COBOL may be a huge long term competitive advantage in the workforce, especially if the current dotcom-esque funny money dries up.

For enough money they will find someone willing to learn COBOL.

Maybe, or maybe not.

Suppose you accept 1.5x or 2x or even 3x your annual salary to take a COBOL job. Nice... for now.

What happens in 2, 5, or 10 years when this COBOL gig ends?

Now your skills have withered or disappeared and you're 2, 5, or 10 years behind when it comes to "modern" technologies where 99.9% of the job opportunities are.

In a sense, that COBOL job is a gamble. You are gambling that you can ride that sucker until retirement.

Of course there are other possibilities. You could sock most of that extra $$$ away and spend a year retraining yourself, or something, if/when that COBOL job ends. Or whatever.

I'd rather learn COBOL and get paid 2x salary for the next 5 years than learn some BS JS framework that I'll have to forget in the same timeframe.

React has been around for 8 years and isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Staking a career on something that has existed for only 8 years is a huge gamble. Most people build careers around concepts and tools that have existed anywhere from decades to millennia.

> What happens in 2, 5, or 10 years when this COBOL ends?

What happens in 1 or 2 years when the current hottest new full-stack, mvc, reactive 3.0 whatever is old and tired and you have to learn the new thing? You learn the new thing.

Sorry, I forgot a word there. Post now edited.

I meant, "when this COBOL gig ends", not "when this COBOL ends" which is what I initially typed.

I agree that COBOL will outlive a lot of these modern flash-in-the-pan frameworks.

However, the number of COBOL jobs will dwindle over time, and if I took a theoretical COBOL job today it's not clear to me that I would be particularly employable if/when that job ended. Particularly if I am unable/unwilling to relocate as I suspect COBOL jobs may be much less likely to be remote.

Whereas, in comparison, if one stays current in Ruby/Python/JS/.NET/Java then one's prospects would remain strong for the forseeable future. "Staying current" on the tech treadmill is of course its own special hell, but it is probably the safer road.

    What happens in 1 or 2 years when the current 
    hottest new full-stack, mvc, reactive 3.0 whatever 
    is old and tired and you have to learn the new 
    thing? You learn the new thing. 

OK, but how employable are you at that point?

It's going to take some significant effort to catch back up.

Perhaps more crucially, your resume is not going to be appealing to potential employers. If they're looking for hotshots in the latest framework, do you think they're going to look kindly upon a candidate who's spent the last X years working with COBOL?

There are ways to address that, such as getting up to speed in Trendy Framework XYZ and making some portfolio pieces, open source contributions, etc. But, that's not always a smooth road.

>OK, but how employable are you at that point?

>It's going to take some significant effort to catch back up.

You got 2x (or whatever) the salary until then. That should give you plenty of time to catch up. Currently anybody is employed anyways if one knows how to use a keyboard. I don't think that is ending anytime soon.

    You got 2x (or whatever) the salary until then. 
    That should give you plenty of time to catch up. 

You can catch up, but your resume can't.

Let's say you take a cushy COBOL job for X years and then spend Y years on your own "catching up."

At that point you're pretty proficient in whatever the trendy thing is at that time.

But what do recruiters see? They see, "this person hasn't worked with anything modern in X+Y years, and hasn't even had a job in Y years"

It can be overcome, but... not ideal.

    Currently anybody is employed anyways if one knows 
    how to use a keyboard. I don't think that is ending
    anytime soon. 

It might still be that way in X+Y years. It might not.

In fairness, the new things tend to build on top of each other. You can get off and on the treadmill but it comes with a cost.

Will they learn enough COBOL to be worth the money? Seeing how hard it is to find good mobile developers, and having lived in a COBOL shop back in the heyday, I don’t see a meaningful number of talented “show me the money” types passing up modern tech for antiques.

>> crumbling antique infrastructure

Are you talking about the hardware or software? It's worth considering that Lindy's Law [1] might apply here.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect