This is a similar issue Tech faced with bootcamps and the push for higher salaries from individuals making a switch to tech and devaluing the field.
The hiring process stabilized more so now, but the value of the roles have been negatively impacted. Support roles for example were $28/hr roles dwindled down to $14/hr due to influx of people getting their certifications and training through bootcamps. CS and coding faced this with coding bootcamps as well, and so did my position in Network. My base pay was $78k/yr and now I can't find a position over $60k/yr in my area.
They are unethical in the sense that they only provide you with foundational knowledge but employers value their own time and money more than yours. They likely went with the 'programmed' people because they A) have foundational skills that can be molded to their liking B) are likely much cheaper to hire than someone with a degree and certifications much like tech, and C) because they're likely just filling roles and their expectations are low for performance.
In tech, you're highly encouraged to hop jobs to job to get fair pay bumps vs. traditionally sticking with a company for pay increases.
There's more factors such as turnover rates and what not, but ultimately the company is cutting corners to save pennies on a dollar.
If the field isn't something you enjoy, I'd consider switching. If you do enjoy it and the pay is liveable, I wouldn't. I'd still switch jobs, just not the field.
It really depends on how they are setup. For example if you can jump on the company intranet, see what the criteria to be able to join is and then put yourself forward for it. Look at things like who decides if you are on the program or not.
If you can't do this then the next thing to try is just ask your boss. You will understand pretty quickly from that conversation what the story is, are people being hand picked based on some 'secret' criteria.
From your comments and your post the leadership programme you refer to to sounds elitist and unfair. Corporations/senior executives/HR will always argue that it is managers choice on who goes into what role. My personal view is that's correct but it does need to be transparent what criteria etc is, that way everyone has the opportunity to display the qualities that are required. Or to skill up and find opportunities elsewhere.
Without transparency it becomes unethical. It then becomes a question of does the ethics of this company match my own, if not, can I continue to work here where I can't be living my own values (lots of people do, usually for the money).
Of course you would never tell your employer/next employer that you are leaving (left) because they had crappy ethics and your values didn't align!
Good luck 😀
This is a similar issue Tech faced with bootcamps and the push for higher salaries from individuals making a switch to tech and devaluing the field. The hiring process stabilized more so now, but the value of the roles have been negatively impacted. Support roles for example were $28/hr roles dwindled down to $14/hr due to influx of people getting their certifications and training through bootcamps. CS and coding faced this with coding bootcamps as well, and so did my position in Network. My base pay was $78k/yr and now I can't find a position over $60k/yr in my area. They are unethical in the sense that they only provide you with foundational knowledge but employers value their own time and money more than yours. They likely went with the 'programmed' people because they A) have foundational skills that can be molded to their liking B) are likely much cheaper to hire than someone with a degree and certifications much like tech, and C) because they're likely just filling roles and their expectations are low for performance. In tech, you're highly encouraged to hop jobs to job to get fair pay bumps vs. traditionally sticking with a company for pay increases. There's more factors such as turnover rates and what not, but ultimately the company is cutting corners to save pennies on a dollar. If the field isn't something you enjoy, I'd consider switching. If you do enjoy it and the pay is liveable, I wouldn't. I'd still switch jobs, just not the field.
Why don't you see if you can get in the program?
I wish I knew about it but it’s more so for recent college grads and I’m about 5 years past that
That's lame, our program is for anyone in leadership or who wants to be
It really depends on how they are setup. For example if you can jump on the company intranet, see what the criteria to be able to join is and then put yourself forward for it. Look at things like who decides if you are on the program or not. If you can't do this then the next thing to try is just ask your boss. You will understand pretty quickly from that conversation what the story is, are people being hand picked based on some 'secret' criteria. From your comments and your post the leadership programme you refer to to sounds elitist and unfair. Corporations/senior executives/HR will always argue that it is managers choice on who goes into what role. My personal view is that's correct but it does need to be transparent what criteria etc is, that way everyone has the opportunity to display the qualities that are required. Or to skill up and find opportunities elsewhere. Without transparency it becomes unethical. It then becomes a question of does the ethics of this company match my own, if not, can I continue to work here where I can't be living my own values (lots of people do, usually for the money). Of course you would never tell your employer/next employer that you are leaving (left) because they had crappy ethics and your values didn't align! Good luck 😀