Pub. 1 2019 Issue 1

short-sighted; it is wasteful. The bet- ter alternative is using the last couple of years of high school as a time to prepare for some kind of skilled trade instead. Using the time this way increases the options students have after graduation. No one is hurt by learning how to work at something that is purely practical. If they want to return to a university later in life, they can. In addition, many workers later in life start their own businesses within the field, using their knowl- edge and experience to create more jobs for others. In the meantime, they have real-world skills that can make going back to school much easier when and if that becomes something they want for themselves. Keep in mind, having multiple di- rections for students to investigate does not mean the smart students who work with their hands, and who decide to forego a university education completely, are somehow less valuable. In 2004, and again in an updated 2014 version, a man named Mike Rose published an important book called The Mind at Work: Valuing the Intelligence of the American Worker. He argues not only that it is wrong to under- value people’s worth based on their job description, doing so creates a significant social penalty. He’s right. These are the facts: • Americans owe more than $1.4 trillion in student loan debt • The average student loan is $38,000 • The average repayment time is 21 years • Forty percent of students in four-year college programs drop out • One in four college grad- uates are unemployed or underemployed When weighing a career in the trades as opposed to a four-year college career path, too many peo- ple have overlooked the obvious: trade school costs less, takes less time, and can be the foundation for a good, well-paid career. Those who take up a trade can work for someone else or start a company. It’s a stable career path. Consider the automotive industry. It does not currently have anywhere near enough people to fill its empty technician jobs. Charlie Gilchrist, a dealer and the current NADA chairman, gave a keynote speech in Janu- ary 2019 at the NADA show in which he said his industry is experiencing what he called “a dangerous shortage of technicians.” Why is the shortage dangerous? Technicians are either retiring or quitting faster than they can be replaced, and training programs sponsored by automakers have emp- ty seats in them. The demand for entry-level auto technicians has gotten worse instead of better, according to Greg Settle, the national initiatives director for TechForce Foundation. Significantly, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the industry will need approximately 46,000 more auto techs by 2026. Why aren’t more people interested in an automotive career? Some of the shortage has undoubtedly been caused by the social pressure to go to college instead, even though that pressure results in truly staggering amounts of toxic debt and a delayed entry into the workforce. But that doesn’t account for all of it. Dealerships themselves could do a great deal to make their companies more attractive. Adam Robinson, CEO of a company named Hireology, which is located in Chicago, lists three key factors that have caused the tech shortage: an un- clear career path, variable pay plans, and working hours that are not great. Technicians also often spend a large amount of money ($5,000 to $50,000) on their own tools. Any dealership that addresses these problems upfront will have a compet- itive advantage. That is something to keep in mind, considering the fact that each technician in a shop creates $1,000 per work day in gross reve- nue. An Automotive News survey, conducted in 2016, found that dealers think they could increase revenue in fixed ops by 17 percent if they had as many techs as they wanted. In other words, young people who are interested in becoming technicians in the automotive industry right now have a very bright future. Income inequality in the U.S. is a reality, and it is getting worse over time. Pushing students in the direction of something they don’t want or can’t afford is not just short-sighted; it is wasteful. The better alternative is using the last couple of years of high school as a time to prepare for some kind of skilled trade instead. Using the time this way increases the options students have after graduation. No one is hurt by learning how to work at something that is purely practical. If they want to return to a university later in life, they can. In addition, many workers later in life start their own businesses within the field, using their knowledge and experience to create more jobs for others. In the meantime, they have real-world skills that can make going back to school much easier when and if that becomes something they want for themselves. Issue 1 2019 19 CFADA.ORG