The 6 Or 7 Career Myth Is Still A Myth

[TheMastersNemesis]

The 6 or 7 or multiple career myth is still a myth. It is Kool Aid put out by corporations benefits only corporations and capital at the expense of workers. We did not build a great nation and a middle class on revolving door labor conditions. Even though that model works for a number of workers, it will not work for most workers.

All I have ever seen with such a model was economic and job insecurity that ends up in disaster. The response I get means that many people have drunk the kool aid. And I will guarantee that in the end such a model is like playing Riussian roulette with six bullets.

The GOP and it big business allies have built up this meme since 1980. And they have built an economy that does not invest in the long term health of society. The mantra that technology moves so fast that you have to have a nomadic work force that pays for training itself is a phony argument. The voters have voted for and accepted this fatally flawed model.

The kind of economy the GOP is building with its policies is the same economy that my grandfather worked under in a mine. There was only work until death for the most part. None of my grandfathers ever even had the hope of ever retiring. And if they died or became disabled their families starved or became homeless.

This labor model is the new world order in an ownership society. I know that I am right on this matter. And it is amazing that so many people believe that this new model will benefit them when they are too old to work. And that will be much younger than anyone thinks.

[Lifelong Protester]

1. I agree. This myth has been around since I started teaching

in 1983. I questioned it then, I question it now.

The model is flawed. It means someone constructing the model is planning for an 'interchangeable parts' society. With workers being the 'parts'.

[FreeJoe]

2. It would help if you explained the myth

I have no idea what you are talking about.

[taught_me_patience]

3. What the hell is the 6 or 7 career myth?

Could you please explain so that we know what you're talking about.

[haele]

9. The 6 or 7 career myth here is the flipside of the college career counselor's "one career myth"

It actually has several different titles; the OP here calls it a "6 or 7 career", but UC Berkley's link below says "5 or 6" careers -

https://career.berkeley.edu/article/070119a-sbd.stm

What it means is that career counselors always tell you that you cannot expect to have one career throughout your lifetime that you will retire from, but you need to plan to have "5 to 7" over your working life.

What this promotes is the idea that regular employment is divorced from the idea of a career. Unless you have a specialized talent or education, you can expect to be a fungible commodity to any business who has a need for an employee. It forces the individual to expand more resources in the beginning to support retirement than the individual's parent did, and it also allows businesses to consider employees as "contractors" - to cover their reputations as good employers while justifying lowering their payroll output by cutting benefits and dropping pensions in favor of the more "portable" 401K. All while not raising wages to cover the increased cost burden to their employees if they want to have benefits or a retirement.
So, you go back to college to get into debt for around $50K to retrain every seven to ten years or so and start back over in the new career once you "top out" of your old career. That's what the 6 to 7 career myth is.

Single employees starting out can still thrive under such an idea, but as soon as an employee starts a family, this places a serious economic and emotional burden, locking that employee into a rather desperate fight to stay afloat and on track to the retirement goal if he or she has not already established a serious retirement plan to cover emergencies and has a home paid in full.

Since employers no longer feel the need to invest in their employees, an employee becomes basically disposable. And that's what the "6 or 7 career myth" really is - telling the college student that they're to consider themselves part of a disposable workforce, so they'd better start preparing themselves to be independent contractors because they're going to be on their own when they hit forty or fifty.

Haele

[taught_me_patience]

16. Nobody has 6-7 careers

That would entail starting over 6-7 times... impossible.

[haele]

17. Depends on what you call career - the 81 year old bagger at the exchange said that was his 6th

different type of work -
Born in 1931 in the mid-west; was a mechanic when he was 14.
He was infantry in the Marine Corps during WWII/Korea, did five - six years, then got furloughed out and settled in California.
He went to college and got a liberal Arts degree; became a Presbyterian minister, didn't work out - most of the neighborhood community he lived at were Methodists...
Went back to college and became a teacher in California - then Reagan happened in the late 60's, early 70's and teaching jobs dried up.
Went back to college and got an engineering degree, joined the Army Corps of Engineers. (Damn that GI bill, that's three degrees it helped him with...) Did 15 years in a structural engineering department in the LA area, then took early retirement in the late 80's, when privatization was starting to take hold in the federal government.
Sold insurance in the 90's. Officially retired in 2003.
Went back to work to pay the bills bagging groceries for tips at the Navy commissary, which pays better than a greeter at Walmart.

His only "voluntary" job loss was the ministry.
The definition of career is at question here -is a career a job that pays the bills, or is it the calling that you employ yourself at? Which would be called my career? My former military service - active or reserve?, as a technician, as an administrative assistant, as an analyst, or a surveyor, or in retail or food service? I've worked all of them, and only the retail and food service work was not what I considered a retirement-worthy work that I wanted to stay at - a career, as it were. But there are a lot of people who's only work throughout their life - their career - would be in manufacturing, retail or food service.

It is not a stretch to think that people will have six or seven different types of jobs throughout their lifetime; this gentleman had at least six.

A good percentage of Americans have 4 or 5 different types of retirement-worthy jobs (jobs they would'nt mind keeping throughout their working career if their employer would keep them) throughout their life.

Haele

[Egalitarian Thug]

4. Of course it is a lie, it is a vital component of The Big Lie

that so many across the entire spectrum have either bought into or make their living selling to others.

K&R

[dmallind]

5. I'm on #4

Chap who works in my department is on #4 too at 10 years younger than me. Can't imagine much more depressing than doing the same thing, even with upward mobility let alone without it, for 50 years.

Not everyone's career is the same, has to be the same or even can be the same, but switching career paths is neither mythical nor uncommon.

[Marrah_G]

6. Could you explain what the myth is?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

[closeupready]

10. I think it's a reference from when Clinton was president,

Robert Reich - as Labor Secretary - espoused the theory that going forward (from the 90's), the career model would no longer be, stay with one company for your entire career, as had happened in the 50's, 60's and 70's, but rather, you'd jump from one job to another, as opportunities opened up and as your plans changed.

[CBGLuthier]

7. You mean I only got one or two left? Damn.

My grandfather worked in the coal mines, then for B&O as an engineer driving trains until his fifties when he retired and became an entrepreneur and traveled the country until his 80's or so.

My father spent 40 years working for the same company, rising to an executive level only to be more or less run off by the company wanting to save money.

I started in medical electronics, drifted into microfilming, gas station attendant, computer search engine designs and programming, making musical instruments and now drifting back into programming for mobiles. I have also recorded two albums of the worst music you would ever hear and, along with my wife raised three children. Did not mention the year or so I spent at home raising children as that is not too popular these days.

I also have a couple of ideas for novels I would like to inflict upon the world and maybe even a third album.

My father's way was boring. Safe and secure but boring.

[jp11]

8. I'm in the camp that's never heard of a 6-7 career myth.

I've heard, more recently, about a 2nd career from the 'old' one which isn't really a myth as technology replaces some professions and shrinks the workforce there. More realistically maybe 2-3 careers might be something we could see, but really 2 'real' distinct careers should be pretty 'good' unless you specialize in really niche/tiny fields that have an expected growth/life span of a few years. All the while keeping your head in the sand never learning a new thing as you work.

As far as employees paying for all the training, 2nd, 3rd or 6-7 that is certainly BS. Corporations could save themselves the lost sales/productivity/etc by not forcing existing workers to cover for the ones they fire or won't hire because they refuse to train anyone in virtually anything.

We do see a bit of nomadic businesses when not just countries compete but our own states go against eachother to lure businesses around taking jobs with them.

[TheMastersNemesis]

11. Addendum To The Myth

What I am talking about with the multiple career myth is the idea that in effect a worker will be faced with fundamentally starting over a number of times in their work career. That means that they will most likely be faced with acquiring a new set of skills via schooling that they will pay for themselves. There are a number of logistical obstacles to such a model for workers that are not readily apparent with this labor model.

The multiple career idea sounds good on the surface. But it is like taking a little bit of arsenic over time. The model is poison for a number of reasons that I am going to state. As a job interviewer I never saw this model as a success for workers over their lifetime. It might work for a number of workers, but for the most part it does not work for probably most workers.

Here are the reasons.

1. It means essentially starting over in a new career at the bottom of the pay scale.
2. It means finding a way to support oneself and their family while they are being retrained for even multiple years and living on low or no wages during that time.
3. It means paying for the schools yourself since the idea now is that workers have to bear the burden that employers have abandoned.
4. It means picking the right training where the jobs will be when the training is completed.
5. It means exhaustive job searches every time one has to make a change.
6. It means being in a situation where you now have to accept another change within a few years and do the process all over again.
7. It means that by the time a worker is middle age they become more of a liability to employers because they now look at the bottom line only and age discrimination on a large scale is now routine.
8. It means that frequent job changes mean that a person will not accrue any sick time or vacation if it is available.
9. It means having no health insurance for periods of time.
10. If you are unemployed in many states you cannot be eligible for unemployment while training unless you qualify for special circumstances like the Trade Readjustment Act which the GOP wants to abolish.

And I could go on with other reasons. There are a lot of obstacles that come up with the new labor agenda. I understand what these jerks are up to and what they hide from workers. The multiple career model (i.e. the ownership model) gives ALL the advantage to the capitalist class and NONE to the worker because under such a model workers become like independent contractors always seeking the next gig.

When I worked at the Colorado Job Service that was also called Employment and Training we dealt with all these training issues.
Working class Americans have been duped. Many jobs that supposedly pay a better wage can take 2 or 3 years to train for. And if you are still working it will take up all of your spare time while you are trying to raise a family if you are married.

The labor model that came out of the New Deal was a good model and it worked for more than a generation. It made it possible for workers to retire in their old age. What Reagan, the GOP and their allies have done is really a crime. This model leads to a life of job insecurity and instability.

Because of my background I have an understanding of the labor and employment system I know what is DELIBERATELY kept from the general public. I understand the code words and what they mean. And everything that I projected about what Reagan was doing starting in 1980 HAS COME TRUE. And none of it has helped working class Americans.

The final solution for workers here and internationally over time is to have full time employment end and be replaced by a "contract or contingency" employment system. The multiple career mantra plays right into that labor model.

I call them the "no job jobs of the 21st century.

[just1voice]

12. Excellent points. My favorite myth was "outsourcing creates jobs"

Pure pablum produced by the 1% to supposedly pacify the public.

[HiPointDem]

13. and it means you'll enter your golden years with limited retirement savings (personal or otherwise).

[laundry_queen]

14. Excellent post. nt

[Yavin4]

15. It Doesn't Work for Most People Because Most People Just Want A Stable Income

Our economy favors the hyper-ambitious climbers, but what about the people who just want a steady career and a work life balance. Not everyone is going to be CEO nor wants to be one. Not everyone wants to be a Mitt Romney nor wants to be one.

Yet, we're all tasked into being career builders, whether we like it or not.

[Populist_Prole]

18. I first heard of that very mantra in the early 90's; Thought it was bunk from the get-go

Uttered by Republicans and by corporate democrats, especially Bill Clinton. My first hunch was it was a way of demoralizing the working class by a high-handed "this is how it's gonna' be, so like it or lump it" admonition.

Basically setting the groundwork for lowered expectations.

[Brickbat]

19. Those of us who entered the workforce in the early 90s had people trying to sell us this horseshit

from the beginning. That would be Clinton and Reich. But it was OK, because we wanted flexibility, right? Of course we did! And we wanted stock options and ping pong tables instead of boring stuff like pensions, right? Yes, yes -- please! Sounds awesome!

Barf.

[jcboon]

20. Yes, like "Who Moved My Cheese"

and other crap they feed us to convince us its our fault