Yes. The hardest part is coming up with new hypotheses to test. Even when it feels like "shotgunning", just going through every possible thing we can think of, we're actually using knowledge--- not just blind trial and error.

I'm not talking about consistency, I'm talking about tasks that involve more than shallow understanding. Many fields take more than a few months to understand the depths. Coming in and using trial and error to try the same thing someone tried a couple of years ago because you don't know the history is not innovation, it's ignorance.

"If you are moving fast and breaking things, do you have the time to know what you are breaking?"
If your goal is consistency, you want structures and people that discourage change and breaking things. If your goal is innovation, you want lots of trial and error. In the modern economy, robots are doing tasks that require consistency and the value is generated by innovation, so much so that the word "innovation" is almost becoming a cliche.

Thus the provision in the contract to make the termination effective 1 day before any such law goes into effect. Even if they make it effective immediately, you are fired yesterday. If they try to go retro, you were fired before that. By making it non-severable, if they say it was never legal, then the entire employment contract is voided, and you never actually worked here...

I agree, and that's what I meant, root... the company and the employee should be free to sign any such contract... or reject it... that's put in front of both of them.
What I meant was that, odds are, some moron bureaucrat/congressmonkey/lobbyist will work to make such freely-entered-into-agreements Illegal.

As teenagers we felt generally safe and invulnerable before 9/11/2001. After that, not so much. Most people have some type of experience like this in their lives, but this happened on a world wide scale. That's all I was referring to. Plus the economic collapse didn't help either. A lot of my peers are a lot more cautious and suspicious as a result, which is not necessarily a bad thing. There are many comments that speak to that here.

Congratulation for surviving school in the "bluest or blue states" and for figuring things out for yourself. You I believe are an exception being that indoctrination, specifically the educational model I am talking about was brought in under the Kennedy administration (the genesis of the "grand" NEA Hegelian experiment). As for the similar event impact wise that happened to your parents (I.e., Kennedy's assassination), that was also my event being that I was a freshman in high school at the time.

I (and I assume your parents) was lucky enough to witness firsthand the roll out of the massive changes to our national education system where it switched from reading, writing, arithmetic and yes, civics to the Hegelian model of indoctrination and propaganda.

Keep in mind, Dewey (of Dewey decimal system fame) was the original progenitor of national education system and he, was a Fabian Socialist (the happy face of Marxism). Going basically from the former to the latter, created what became the real backbone of your educational underpinnings (I.e., Arbor day, and all of the rest of the Liberal/Progressive propaganda - circa 1970's and forward).

It was during this time that Whole Language and Whole Math because included. Outcome Based Education (OBE) and ultimately everything else was incrementally added so that now students are taught; 1) they are special, 2) they are entitled, 3) they now respond to Group Think such as Global Warming, later to become known as Climate Change because the models and contrived protocols these the "so-called" scientists were using were cherry picked and did not support the mantra with good science.

However, through the efforts of the brainwashing that has been going on for several generations now, we are raising numbers of "disconnected", borderline sociopaths. It has been subtle but relentless. BTW, that last statement about sociopaths came from a VP of a large school district in one of the "bluest of blue states".

I do not mean to denigrate the individuals of these post Dewey generation because they have been subjected to some of the most sophisticated brain-washing and indoctrination that this world has ever seen. A perfect example of the Sociopath who feels entitled and acts that way is President Obama. Take a look at him, his administration and the way he deals with adversity and how he works with people.

I rest my case. BTW keep up with the Critical Thinking a continue to resist what is going on. I'm pulling for you and your generation!

Thanks Jan, see the response above.

OK let me clarify, a huge defining moment in my life was September 11, 2001 and that is actually what I was talking about. I was just turning 16 so having something happen to you at that age tends to make a big impression. I guess I would compare it to my parent's experience of the Kennedy assassination. Then just as we were entering or exiting college, the economy collapsed. That is one piece of it, but I was specifically thinking of September 11th when I speak of the "rug" of security. I find a lot of people in my generation who distrust banks and the stock market and are very conservative with their money. Maybe this affects some of us differently who weren't raised to be spoiled brats. This makes me wonder if the 'Millennial' complaint is really anything new. Does the older generation who always had to walk up the hill both ways to school in -20 degree temperatures always end up grumping about the next generation? It kind of seems that way and I'm sure I'll do it with generation '40 characters or less' or whatever it will be called. I grew up in one of the bluest states of the union and got a liberal arts degree from a University that has a 'Bias Response Team', but somehow I figured it out and I know I'm not the only one.

That's the thing though, it shouldn't be a bill, it should be free employers entering a contract with free workers.

Dear jlc:
Why do I consider a manual-laboring job to be
the "sweet spot" in my career? What kind of ques-
tion is that? Did I say anything about its being
"sweet"? I am unemployed, I want and need a job, and I am trying to get the job I think I might
be able to get. I have had "education" for what
it is worth (zero), and that's not helping me. I
skipped 2nd-year French in high school, went
into the 3rd year, and made straight A's in it.
No employer in the United States (so far as I
know) gives a s--t about that. (I have picked up
a few other languages, too--also deaf-mute sign
language, but no employer wants that). I have
taken numerous tech courses. I went to a busi-
ness school which closed down after a few
months, later I passed a Basic Machine Shop
course, later a Naval Radioman course (though
I was later honorably discharged from the Re-
serve for epilepsy), later I passed a keypunch
course, and, most recently, it was a computer
course (years 2001--2002). I got a 2.0 GPA;
both computer lab managers told me the ma-
chines had been programmed not to go with the
book. Probably it was the wrong book; a sec-
ond-hand book I got from a fellow student. I
couldn't afford a new one.
Such education does me no good at all in
the job market; but it has taught me not to waste
money on going to school. It seems that at ev-
ery job fair (I despise job fairs,they are so worth-
less), but nearly every time, it seems that there
is some crook trying to push his school, but I
can't afford it; I'm not going to fall for that again.
But I have had long years in the workforce; was
almost never out of work, and then not for long,
up until about a year ago. I have had consider-
able experience in plants of different sorts, and
also food service. So that is why I am trying to
get a manual-laboring job, because I think it is
the kind of job I would have the best chance to
get. I'm not a millenial, sitting in my parents'
home, lazily trying to pick and choose whatever
happens to suit me best. I hope that answers
your question.

I think that attitude (not wanting short timers) is only going to mean you hire accomplished liars -- just like women's expectation that boyfriends should want to stay for life.

I'd bet there's some politician at some level that would find that concept enticing and float a bill to make it happen... Give it a shot! Or maybe as an op-Ed piece?
:)

Do you know who I want to shake? All these Radio Babies, Baby Boomers, and Gen X-ers that are constantly talking about how terrible we Millennials are. No generation is perfect, each one has its flaws. Yes, we suck, yes we are entitled, yes we think we get a trophy just for participating, but we did not get that way on our own. Our Baby Boomer and Gen X parents raised us that way. A lot of us leave jobs after two years because we don't appreciate our older coworkers treating us like little children (as my 70 year old coworker does me and everyone else more than 10 years younger than her ALL DAY LONG). Or we leave because we were lied to in the job description and the job is actually far more hellish than we ever dreamed. Being born in 1984, I am old for a Millennial. That being said, I would KILL to work more than two years at a place, but I keep getting laid off because the Baby Boomer liberal politicians are repeatedly driving the economy into the ground. Please STOP lumping all of us into one stereotype! I know many people of my generation that have a greater work ethic than people twice their age because they show up every day to actually do their job rather than socialize with each other and show each other pictures of their children and grandchildren. Expect more of us, and maybe we will give you more.

The clause would of course be non-sever-able from the terms of employment. The special interest group that tried to kill it would be the one threatening the job. Now my workforce turns on the special interest.

In practice all the agreement does is accelerate the timeline of bad policy. Such policy would eventually kill the company, and all the jobs, just like in AS. This agreement is a recognition of that fact, and cuts out the inefficiencies of a government killing a company. A free market optimization of the collapse, if you will.

THAT would appear to be a wonderful free-market contractual agreement which a dozen special interest groups would NEVER allow to happen!
:)

I don't fault people for moving on from dead-end jobs. What I criticize is the entitlement mentality that seems to be so prevalent among millennials. That was the crux of the article.

I don't disagree with you that both employer AND employee should benefit from the employee's work. Value for value. Are there companies that don't understand how to manage employees? Lots of them, unfortunately. Two of my brothers and a brother-in-law all worked for the same company where the three co-owners of an investment banking place raked in millions, but when each of my relatives in turn asked for a raise from ~$50K up (managing hundreds of millions of customer funds nonetheless), they were unceremoniously shown the door right there. And those companies were not only throwing money out the door (a typical training cycle in their business was a full year before profitability) but they were losing highly-motivated, highly-educated, ethical employees (all three had Masters' degrees).

What I would also point out, however, is that many of these millennials are missing that passion and drive to learn new skills, take on new challenges, and spend the time necessary to develop themselves into the leaders they picture themselves as. They think that it will come with no effort on their parts. And I've seen it and dealt with it up front and enough to know that it isn't an isolated phenomenon. I don't have any problem with someone wanting to prove their value. I do have a problem with people who assume a value they haven't proven.

It also seem to me that K-12 does a pretty good job of coddling children too which I believe contributes to these attitudes. Did you notice that or am I off base?

I've often wondered if you could get an employee to sign an agreement similar to a pre-nup that says if such a law were ever to be passed, they would all be fired the day before it does into effect. If business owners everywhere did that, then The People, or rather, the subset of the people that works, would go ape at the very thought of such a law, and would reign in their elected reps.

I tend to agree with you on this, Fred. Nice to meet another Viking, too...

I agree Snoogoo is the only one that knows. I read it with a sarcastic tone and could make it work. :)

We won't know if you're right or wrong without more feedback/data from Snoogoo....

I won't hire someone who has no longevity in the workplace.
As an employer there's just nothing good about that.

Either they are difficult to get along with, incompetent, or (to give them the maximum benefit of doubt) they are going to take what they want and leave.
Even if they have a skill I desperately need - what good will they do me a year from know when they get the wander lust.

Screw 'em. There's plenty more where they came from.
They'll see how that's workin' out for them when they get closer to 40.

I worked at my first "real job" for ten years... almost to the day... before leaving. I was bored. The division of the Company was not investing in growth and while I found myself developing skills in marketing, there was no career path from hard engineering into marketing. Hell, towards the end, I was coaching the 'marketing gurus' on pricing issues, and when they didn't listen to me, WE 'left money on the table' for our customers.

At the second company I worked for (for 24 years) after some time I became part of the interviewing team and rejected one bright young candidate for a very simple reason: During the interview she said (didn't IMPLY, but SAID) that, "well, I've been in this position for x years (where x was <=5 or so) and it was time to move on."
I figured that the year or two she'd have taken to learn how to fit into our culture and understand our product lines, would be wasted investment on our part when that 'little bell in her head went off' and signaled her it was 'time to leave.'
Funny, but one of the guys we DID hire... very self-confident, polished, and member of a minority.... demanded a high starting salary and a Company Car for his 'zero-level management position." When management explained the we didn't give cars to anyone less than about 3rd level management, he tried to get the rule changed. I didn't get a chance to vote on him. I wish I had.
Such is "life in the Big City." Those kinds of experiences made me VERY happy when I got a "retirement package offer I couldn't refuse..."

Bless you and your child. And the other kids and their parents won't even begin to understand the Lessons shes learning until she DOES fire them.
Warn her to have ALL her ducks in a row before firing any of those weasels, because as things are going now, it's likely those moochers will sue her under some "fairness" rule they'd invented.