The Economics of Veteran Unemployment
Veteran unemployment rates are 9.2% for those serving after 9/11. That statistic is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of February 2014. Last year at the same time it was 9.4%. Comparatively, the unemployment rate for non-veterans is 6.9%, and was 7.9% the previous year. For veterans of other eras, their unemployment rate is 6.3% and was 6.9%.
It is a startling statistic–as well as deeply disturbing. Why do our veterans leave the military, only to find themselves less employable than their civilian counterparts, especially our newest generation?
The problem was glaringly obvious to me when I returned home from my third tour to Afghanistan and I found myself working at a food court serving pizza. I was happy for the opportunity and glad that someone was willing to hire me. I worked hard and tried to reduce the impact of my National Guard obligations on them as best I could–even if it was just a cashier position. But it burned. Six months prior I was managing repair and installation projects for cellular and data networks. I was a Staff Sergeant during my drill weekends, managing a platoon of combat medics, who supported a cavalry squadron. And then I took off my uniform, grabbed my visor and apron and always made sure to ask if the customer wanted a caesar salad with their order.
My situation wasn’t unique, and it wasn’t until I connected two very important lessons that either the veterans need to accept or civilian employers need to educate themselves about. (Sadly, my guess is that capitalism will win and Veterans will need to accept their fate.) First, was when a friend, who had never served and had worked in the civilian market in an executive position, made this casually ignorant comment about military leadership. “Your experience doesn’t translate. You just tell your guys what to do and they do it. Things don’t work like that in the civilian world.”
I wish. I wish it were that easy, but he didn’t know any better.
Second, was when I was studying my Labor Economics textbook. It discussed the amount of experience that a person gains while working in a position, and how that experience makes them more valuable. This experience is only applicable to that position, however.
That is the problem. That is the barrier that we can’t overcome: the combination of the belief that our experience doesn’t translate, and the simple fact that we don’t have experience in the civilian market. Many of our skills can be translated, but a civilian employer doesn’t know which ones. In addition, we are simply entry level employees in the eyes of those organizations seeking qualified applicants. There is no doubt that we have gained skills and experience, but rarely in the fields of employment we are attempting to gain access to, which is why so many of us must behave like someone freshly entering the market, with no job skills, because that is what we are–at least in the eyes of the hiring managers.
The hard part for us is that we know we do have skills, the kind of skills that civilian employers are demanding. I can see it, as I push through college. I’m forced to take classes dedicated to speaking in front of a group, writing professional correspondence, and simply working in a team. That was three separate courses–summarized, two 100 level courses, and a 400 level course. Taking these courses, is to simply prove to my future civilian employer that I am capable of functioning and communicating in a professional environment. All of these were things I learned in the military: teaching classes to my peers and subordinates, briefing my superiors, and working in a team.
Many of the issues have to do with our pride. Every veteran I know complains about attending college with these “kids.” It is a perfectly understandable frustration. We now operate under completely different frames of reference than most of America. Why should we have to stand in line with all these kids, people who didn’t serve, and be treated as their equals? We shouldn’t, but then again, in the eyes of the greater capitalist machine–those firms that would hire us–we are viewed simply for what production value we can offer. The hiring manager as a human being appreciates and perhaps, even sympathizes with our plight, but they have a job to do, and that job is to hire as many qualified applicants as they can for the lowest cost.
To do this, they have pre-established requirements that an applicant must meet, simple easy to assess criteria to determine what our production value is to the hiring firm. Veterans are not easily assessed. We don’t have the same certifications, and our experience doesn’t translate well onto paper to fill in their check boxes. As a result, we aren’t hired.
Why doesn’t the military simply support us with these civilian certifications? We do the same jobs right? Two reasons: cost and retention. Many certifications require training that goes beyond the scope of the job that the military requires of the veterans. Why would they train us, so that we could leave? Training is expensive, and it would be a waste of taxpayer money to train us then let us go. It sucks, but it is reality.
So there we are: the veterans of foreign wars, combat proven individuals capable of thinking critically and performing under the kind of stress that the civilian market can’t reproduce. This, my generation of veterans, is the same experience as those veterans who came before us. But none of that matters. What we need to do is gain the credentials which the civilian market has established to ease the burden on their hiring managers. Then, once we have entered those positions, we, as human beings, can be evaluated more closely. Our productivity can be measured and our experience can be really put to the test against our civilian counterparts. That is where we will show the value of our experience and our productive capabilities.
Category: Economy, Military issues, National Guard, Reserve Issues, Veterans Issues
I worked a supply room for nine years. As a supply specialist, then an infantry company supply clerk, and finally as a company supply clerk in a battalion HHC company supply sergeant. I’ve applied to many different warehousing companies, supply companies, shipping companies, and the like. I get the same reply time and time again: I’m overqualified.
I spent nine years of my life in a trade. I get out of the military and I have too much experience. They can’t pay me what my experience is worth. I’m overqualified.
Right now, I’m a part-time janitor in a nursing home. Is this my dream job? Hell NO! I was happy working supply. I actually loved working supply. But now, I can’t work supply.
What’s really hilarious is one of my friends who was ROTC and went Quartermaster Corps, ended up getting the job. We had a laugh because he, as a 2LT, was told that his leadership skills were a benefit to the company. How does a butter bar have leadership skills while an NCO is just overqualified?
The hard part is the imperfect information exchanged between a business hiring an employee and the service member seeking employment. They don’t know what our pay and benefits package looked like and how it compares to their own. So, they honestly don’t know if they will have to pay us more than what they otherwise would, because they don’t understand what we were paid before.
The other part is that in the eyes of that employer in your situation, you are applying for an entry level position with 9 years of experience. When he looks at what that is worth to the company and what he is able to pay you they don’t match up.
That butter bar didn’t have any experience but he had potential. He would get hired over you because he is less costly in the present, but has potential in the long run. Remember that this is the perception of the employer.
It is ugly, and not right. If I were you I would make myself look far less experienced on my resume, without lying, because that is fraudulent. Then kick ass for my employer. Or just don’t give up. Saturate every potential employer in the area, walk into places and talk to them (Which maybe you have done). Let them know what you are currently doing and what you are willing to do for them. And don’t burn any bridges, civilians talk to one another just like we do. That guy over at one warehouse may have a buddy looking for someone at a place you never thought about.
Another option which is the one I’m pursuing is use the hell out of your GI benefits if you still have them, then utilize your schools job placement programs and walk into a job higher than the guys who turned you down.
Good luck.
Something to look into, if you haven’t already, is aviatuion. Most places tend to be more veteran friendly, specifically Gulfstream. You may have to go through a contract house such as Johnson Service Group, or Aerotek, but it will get you in the door. Also, try jsfirm.com. I actually broke into civilian aviation through that site. Just my two cents.
Just some personal opinions: I think a large part of the unemployment problem lies with the fact that we relied so heavily on Guard and Reserve personnel during the wars. Employers (understandably) are reluctant to hire folks who are deployable and will be lost to them for a year (or more). And the law requires them to usually hold their position open for them until they return – that can be hard for some smaller businesses. Coupled with the news organizations making it sound as if every Soldier who returns is a PTSD suffering suicide machine, it makes our troops appear undesirable in the civilian workforce. Ironically, the company I’ve worked for during the last 15 years hired me directly because of my prior service. I got lucky. Maybe with the wars drawing to an end, employers will be less paranoid about hiring good troops and eventually this will even out…
Oh yeah, I’m working a blog related to that. I just try to not get overly complicated and focus on one thing at a time.
You are absolutely right. I’ve never been not hired because of my Guard requirements but I’ve not been promoted and I can see the stress it puts on my employer. I can’t really blame them, they have a business to run. It just sucks for the Guardsman or Reservist.
I have an issue understanding this discrepancy. Not once in my entire employment background have I run into issues being ‘military’ of any sort. Not once. Small companies, large (Fortune 100) companies, have ever given it a thought.
What I have issue with is the statistics. Is this a self-licking cone here? Are these vet statistics self-reported? Or is BLS checking every claim of being a vet, or vet-related, for accuracy? Validity?
I could claim to be a 10-pt preference all over the place- but few would actually check. What I’m saying here is, how many are CLAIMING to be unemployed vets, but are actually not? Just for the boost they hope to get?
I believe there are other factors at play IN ADDITION to ones relating to veteran status that affect one’s status on employment; these can be, IMHO, deeper factors than the vet status. MOSTLY because I believe there are too many false-reports out there.
Flame on- but I’m still not convinced.
Don’t worry, no flame on.
The BLS is a self reported survey. One thing to note is that it doesn’t survey the same group of people every time, it surveys different people every time. This reduces the potential for error.
I do know that especially on this site we are more sensitive to people lying about their veteran status. No, they don’t confirm the veteran status of anyone who identifies themselves to be one. The only question about the value of being fraudulent on these forms is why would a person. People are selected by address not name, their personal information is kept confidential by law and you receive no benefit for being honest or dishonest.
Studies have been conducted to demonstrate the differences in validity between self reported and non-self reported surveys and there was only slight differences in the data.
The BLS conducts the survey on approximately 60,000 households gathering data on approx. 110,000 individuals. It is widely regarded as an accurate measure of unemployment statistics. It also reports deviation measurements. These would show the range of where statistically the real answer most likely lies within.
No statistical set is perfect, all we can do is work with what we have available. But just because data is imperfect doesn’t mean it is invalid.
I would also like to know that the data is age-normed. I’d guess that many post-9/11 vets are relatively younger (many early 30s or less). Unemployment for that age demographic kinda sucks across the board. “First hired, last fired” has been a union mantra for decades.
If the stats don’t account for that, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Not saying that’s what’s going on – but it wouldn’t be the first time stats have been quoted without accounting for different demographic differences between two populations.
You guys don’t mess around with your statistics. They were in there to illustrate that a problem does exist and some explanations for those problems.
The age range would be 30 or less, I’ll link below a more detailed chart for age ranges.
I did the math on the ranges in question which would be 22-30, the data available doesn’t start at 22, but 20. Which is ok, because that would consider reservists who are completed with training and looking for work. Looking at that the total unemployed for ages 20-24 and 25-29, there total population surveyed was 42,928. Those unemployed in those ranges were 3,361. With an unemployment rate for that population of 7.82%.
This doesn’t take into account gender or race, disabled or not disabled.
The other thing to consider is that unemployment is only defined by those who are currently receiving unemployment benefits. It won’t include those who are not working and not pursuing employment. Those could include college students, or individuals who simply chose to not participate in the labor force at all.
All things considered my point in the blog is to show where veterans may find frustration with seeking employment, and some sources of those frustrations
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat03.htm
Actually, Adam, it appears that the unemployment issues for post 9/11 vets may be largely if not completely explained by demographics.
Per the BLS, for Feb 2014 unemployment in the 20-24 y/o age group is 11.9%; for the 25-34 y/o age group, it’s 7.0%. Above that age, it’s 5.1% or less (5.1% for the next two age brackets and 4.5% for 55+).
http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea10.htm
Let’s assume 90% of post-9/11 vets are 34 y/o or younger. (I have no idea if this is correct or not, but it seems reasonable to me.) Making the additional assumption that 5 of every 10 post 9/11 vets are 20-24, 4 are 25-34, and 1 is 35+ and doing the math (weighted average of unemployment rate for that distribution, and assuming 5.0% for 35+ as an aggregate), using the general population data for unemployment rate you get an unemployment rate for that group of 9.25%. That’s about what the data says is actual (9.2%).
Hey, I hear what you’re saying – post-9/11 vets are hurting re: employment. But right now, statistically speaking it simply sucks (employment-prospects wise) if you’re less than 35 years old, vet or otherwise. I’d guess that most post-9/11 vets fall into that category.
Complaints regarding this situation need to be directed to those in DC whose policies since Jan 2009 have prolonged the current economic doldrums. That prolonged economic stagnation is screwing everybody – vet and non-vet.
Not trying to take a potshot; I just like checking assumptions against data. And here, based on available data it looks like the “we’re screwing over our veterans unfairly regarding unemployment” thesis just might be invalid. The BLS data says pretty much everyone under 35 is having a hard time finding a job – not just vets.
Find some demographic data on post 9/11 vets (e.g., the age breakout) and we can calculate the expected vs. actual unemployment rate for that group more accurately than my quick and dirty, assumption-filled case above. If there’s a substantial difference between expected and actual then, I’ll agree you might have a point.
I understand what you are saying. I also appreciate your work because it shows myself and anyone else reading this how important a focus on being factually correct and not misleading readers is important.
I’ve attached a great link below to show the age distributions for the post 9/11 generation.
http://vets.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Employment-Situation-Oct.20131.pdf
The graph shows some areas in which older veterans are really doing well compared to their civilian counterparts and others in which there is a massive difference.
I’ve been less focused on making a point then offering a few possible reasons and solutions for the problems that do exist.
Transitioning between the military civilian divide is tough, no matter the branch. The maintaining of dual careers for guard/reserve is even harder. Fortunately for me, I’m in a field where my experience translates directly back and forth (healthcare) and my military experience is viewed favorably by many medical types as healthcare also highly values teamwork, communication and the ability to think under pressure. As a fellow AR/NG type; I say to those: Don’t loose hope. Our generation of veterans has a lot to offer, and it’s a matter of overcoming forty plus years of post Vietnam stereotypes and misconceptions. Lead by example, and hold onto your military values and ethos. Those, plus a large dose of perseverance will bridge the divide. For the last year, I’ve been enrolled in an Acute Care Advanced Practice nursing program, ad a school where the veteran population is almost nonexistent. I try to live our values, and lead by example, and guess what? It’s working. I heard one of my fellow students offering help to another with something, and when the other one accepted with thanks, the first said ‘Hey, no problem! One team, one fight, right?’ and turned to wink at me.
We may have higher unemployment rates, and may not be the ‘typical’ student or entry level employee, but if we hold to our ethos and support each other and those around us, we can export the most valuable aspects of the military culture. Discipline, respect, teamwork and camaraderie. This is our post military mission.
Well said, once we get into the work force we will excel in any position we take up because of the things we learned. The hard part is just getting there sometimes.
Interesting take & some good points.
It’s part of why I opted as a post-command captain to opt into a career field that would provide me with a civilian sector skillset, and why I have been plotting my exit strategy since 2000, when I turned a blogging gig into a paid writing position.
I owe this to LTC Boe B., a great boss, who asked me a simple question one day in his office.
It’s why I always ask my soldiers about their post-Army plans and press them about details so they don’t get out for the sake of getting out without knowing what opportunities (or lack thereof) await them.
I wish someone would have asked me that question. Not a lot of thought to that in the infantry though. I just knew I wanted college and was content with the jobs I took, as they were a means to an end.
I sympathize with the plight of veterans, but I think I might have another part of the explanation. According to Department of Labor, youth employment for ages 19-24 only 61%. No matter how you cut it, the current sluggish economy hurts youth the most because they are bound to have the least work experience. You put an ex-manager who’s forty and unemployed through layoffs and a kid just out of college in front of a hirer, and who do think they’ll pick? I have little doubt employer bias has something to do with veteran unemployment, but I wonder how many young people get out of the military and just get put in the same boat as young civilians? Specifically, how much of the problem of veteran unemployment is actually related to veterans or their special circumstances?
We do get lumped in with the rest of the crowd. Which causes problems, but our special circumstances or backgrounds also causes extra points of resistance.
How’s the employment in 1/221? When I was there in 2011 the SCO said that unemployment in the Squadron was about 50%, and that even 25% of the officers were unemployed.
No idea the overall statistics. But when I try to think of the guys I know with what could be considered a really good job in the civilian side I can’t think of any. Especially when I think of how many of my really great Soldiers are begging for AGR spots. I keep pushing college, but that doesn’t feed their wife and kids now. I’m lucky to have full GI Bill, something most Reserve and Guardsman don’t have.
You got to find the right company. Some companies are actively recruiting NCOs into their managment. I was hired by the railroad to work as a supervisor of a repair facility before I was even fully retired (and I’m a combat arms guy, not a mechanic). They wanted our leadership experience, said they would teach us the job, but could not teach us the leadership skills we had already had.
There are great companies out there but unless they recruit directly we don’t know they exist. I was offered a job with an oil company and because I was an NCO at ETS I was offered a supervisory position. I turned it down because I was married at the time and didn’t want to be away so much. But those are organizations that understand our value and what we can contribute, many simply don’t.
Here’s what I saw in my Reserve unit when we got back from Iraq: a metric butt-ton of young Joes who had plans to start school in the fall (three months hence), the Post-9/11 GI Bill lined up (anywhere from 60% to 100% coverage), a year’s worth of tax-free income sitting in the bank, and a fully-satisfied “prior employment” requirement under state unemployment law. You just came back from war, and you’re about to be a full-time student, and you can either pound the pavement looking for summer work you don’t really need, or you can let the state send you $370/week.
This report is probably 4-5 years old, but it goes through some alternate reads on post-9/11 vet unemployment:
http://www.gijobs.com/the-real-story-behind-veteran-unemployment-rates.aspx
Great article. We still need to keep pushing our guys toward getting into the market and accepting these low positions so that they can show how great they are. Step one is trying.
Some may not like my comment, but here it goes! I knew what I was getting into when I signed up. I enlisted pre- 9/11 yet still expected I would one day be deployed in a hostile environment considering I was an 0311 in the USMC. I was cool with that. I also knew that wouldn’t mean much in the outside world. I knew I was SACRIFICING my time and even my life if it came to that for my country. When I was put on a med board, I knew my time was up and I needed to prepare. I signed up for school and lined up a crappy job that would pay the bills. I got out and got started, struggling with the dreaded PTS and some substance abuse. It was rough, but I knew I would have to do what I had to do to be marketable. This is our reality. We volunteered to do what the country needs us to do, and should have known what we were getting into. Problem is that not many did their research. I did, and wasn’t really surprised when I got out. I also understand I volunteered and therefore have no one else to blame but myself for the situation I faced when I was forced out. I feel for veterans going through problems. I meet vets every day who can’t find a job or are unhappy with the one they have. However, when I ask them if they are in school or considering it probably 70% (at least) of them say they don’t have time for it or simply have no intention of going… At that point I am tired of listening to them complain (not really, but I wish I could be.) I work for the VA in mental health and have been disappointed with my fellow OIF/OEF vets, at times. They come in and say “I served my country and this is the thanks I get?!?!?!” I look at them and say “you volunteered… no one asked you to- you chose to. Here is what is available… Read more »
I meant to mention that there are a lot of programs available to unemployed vets but many don’t want to deal with the hassle. It’s frustrating as hell, which is why I ranted a bit. I just want to grab these kids (OIF/OEF) and shake them… but I can’t. They want instant gratification but it’s not going to happen. You have to work for it most of the time.
Ed, I’m never against a well put together rant. You are right, there are plenty of programs in place to support vets. I haven’t had good experiences with them, as they were applied corporate side. The reason being it was just employers trying to target veterans, saying we are a higher class of employees then paying us the same.
I didn’t get involved because I saw what those programs were offering, my focus has been school anyway. Everything else is an accessory.
Part of what I wanted to say in this blog is that we can’t change the market, we need to consider the rules for entry as ROEs and simply abide by them to accomplish the mission. Mission being to thrive, which is what we do. The reason a lot of that hasn’t happened is pride, and youthful arrogance. All we can keep doing is trying though.
Adam- exactly. Adapt and overcome. Don’t get frustrated with the reality of the situation. Identify your goals, identify your strengths and ability to reach those goals, be honest with yourself, and do what you have to do to get there or change your goals into realistic ones and repeat the steps. It can get frustrating, but we learn more from the struggle. In the mean time, I would really like a few veterans to come my way who are ready for the struggle…
All we can do is stay positive and give everyone the benefit of the doubt. It isn’t easy, and the hardest part is convincing them that they are the only ones who can really help themselves.
Truth. I keep reminding myself that it isn’t personal. They make their own decisions. I still take it hard sometimes when I feel I am giving them great advice and they go off and blow it all rather than taking that advice. If I took every case personal I’ll be burned out real quick. Thanks for the blog post. It was a good read.
“What we need to do is gain the credentials which the civilian market has established to ease the burden on their hiring managers. Then, once we have entered those positions, we, as human beings, can be evaluated more closely. Our productivity can be measured and our experience can be really put to the test against our civilian counterparts. That is where we will show the value of our experience and our productive capabilities.”
NAILED IT!!
This is a nice article and the comments address many good points as well. I would like to reiterate the idea that civilian credentials for service members is an excellent idea, and more areas of the military should adopt this. I know that Army personnel branch (Adjutant General) is promoting SHRM credentialling among its members, vehicle mechanics have the opportunity for ASE certification, (some) truck drivers get CDLs, medical and aviation personnel have a whole laundry list of licensing. On the flip side, there is more that we could be doing: Project Management Profession certification from PMI would be applicable for most NCOs and officers, professional engineering certification for engineers, construction skills, etc.
The way I see it, anything I can do to improve my soldiers (and myself) is good for the military. So what if people consider it wasted training funds? Ultimately, most training funds are wasted. That’s kind of the point of training. So, what if it makes soldiers more suitable for civilian employment and more likely to seperate from the service? It also makes them more suitable for thier military job and shows that the military is willing to invest in them and they might return the favor. Also, there are plenty of privates going through basic training right now (and cadets in ROTC), because we are all replacable. Finally, presently the Army (at least if not all the branches) is trying to reduce its numbers, so helping soldiers get out should be a good thing. Unfortunately, not all leaders see things the way I do.