by Dale Hannah
One of the key issues Director of Economic Development Bob Spaulding covered at the county exec.’s town hall meeting last Wednesday is the proposed regional community college. In responce to a question I posed, trying to find solid reasoning in the effort, he described many of the issues involved.
The Erie area has a vast shortage of highly skilled workers. While the private institutes provide some skilled training, the manufacturers are not able to simply hire ready-to-go personell. He mentioned several industries that have a constant need for properly trained welders, who currently have 50 to 60 openings they are unable to fill.
In fields such as engineering, most of the graduates of Gannon (70%) are not locals, who might be more likely to stay here in Erie.
The cost of tuition at some of the private trade schools is extremely high, from $17,000 to $26,000 per year. Very few displaced or recent high school grads who do not choose to attend a college are not able to afford trade school.
As required by the State of Pa., the community college must set up it’s curriculum based on the needs of the area businesses and manufacturers. Every three years, the curriculum must be reviewed and/or amended to reflect the type of jobs the community requires over the next few years.
The cost of operating the CC would be divided into thirds, one third each from tuition, county, and state. Spaulding also stated that several regional communities have expressed an interest in sending students to Erie County for training, including Warren, Pa. and some others. The students from outside the county would reimburse the CC for the total cost of their education. In this and other ways, the cost of operating the school would not be a burden on Erie County taxpayers.
Since the CC would draw students mainly from our area, they would likely find employment locally that would provide substantial earning power, thus encouraging them to remain here in Erie County. Many of the positions they would be trained to fill would be at entry level wages of $15-$18 thousand dollars, such as welders.
Tuition at the CC would be substantially lower than private schools, allowing more participation from lower-income residents, or those for whom the high cost of college would be a major obstacle.
The students would be more fully trained to perform the duties required for a particular job, at a lower cost.
Any attempt to market the regional assets to a prospective client entails the ability to provide a skilled workforce. With all (1500) jobs that are left unfilled, it’s hard to convince the client that an adequate workforce is available. A Community College would help increase the quantity of qualified workers.
In the end, it appears to me that the reasoning is sound, and the benefits of a Community College make it a good investment for the Erie Area. Agree or disagree, I’d like to hear your thoughts.
Thanks to Bob Spaulding for his input.
More discussion topics to follow.
I am a life-long resident of Erie County, twenty years of which were spent living in the City of Erie. I retired from the tool-and-die trade two years ago, and now have time to enjoy the opportunity to observe city and county goings-on in more depth.
I hope to create a venue to suggest new ideas and solutions to exisiting problems with my blog, 'What If?'.
Mike
July 19th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
There is some sound reasoning, but I still am skeptical about this.
I disagree about engineering grads not wanting to stay in Erie. I know there are many with 4-year degrees in engineering that have tried for jobs in Erie and had to go elsewhere because they couldn’t get hired. That’s why I never understand why companies such as GE say they have trouble finding them.
I also wasn’t aware that the Community College would teach technical skills such as welding. I thought it was meant to be a cheaper alternative to a four-year college. Training for welders makes sense for this area, but this raises several questions for me. Isn’t that what a technical school is for? Why wouldn’t the Erie county technical school teach the high school kids this skill if there is such great demand? And if a community college is going to help all these positions get filled, and place all these students into jobs, does this mean a 4-year degree at Gannon or Mercyhurst means nothing for a person wanting to stay in Erie? There are many 4 year graduates who can’t get more than a minimum wage job in Erie, but these CC grads are going to go to make twice that according to Bob Spaulding? Are companies in Erie really ready to hire 60 welders at that wage? What companies are all these jobs at?
I will say that this could work if this is properly done; unfortunately, the leaders in Erie have never given me a reason to be optimistic about a public spending project. When it comes to these projects (such as the casino and the supposed tax breaks) what is said in the beginning and what actually happens are often two different things.
Dale Hannah
July 19th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Mike, from my experience in the manufacturing field, the training at the technical schools does not qualify someone to perform their jobs at any place beyond entry level. Welders in the higher skill levels must be able to do more than make two pieces of metal stick together. Welding pressure vessels or ship holds requires much more skill. Erie Ship Building and Custom Engineering are always trying to hire skilled welders, and yes, the wages are higher. Erie Ship Building has turned down work due to lack of welders.
When you speak of four-year college graduates who are flipping burgers, in what field is their training? Mercyhurst is a liberal arts school, and while Gannon may graduate some engineers, I dare say most come from other areas for the good education and have no intention of locating here. That said, the colleges are good for the local economy due to rents and such that the students pay, as well as their patronage of local businesses. That in itself makes having the schools in Erie a win-win situation. But to gain employment the degrees must be in a needed field. How many BAs turn out be useless as far as getting a good job? At this point in time, undergrad degrees are required as often as high school diplomas used to be.
The private trade schools earn their profits by turning out graduates.
The Community College is to be based on turning out tradesmen who fill the needs of Erie businesses and manufacturers.
We can only hope that they do what they are expected to do.
dh
john morris
July 20th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Well said Dale.
Jim
July 21st, 2008 at 6:51 am
GE for decades has raided the employees of other Erie industries, especially in the case of welders. It is simply easier to offer more money for labor someone else trained and vetted. I sincerely doubt the CC will be successful based upon supplying unvetted employees to GE. And 50 - 60 welding positions is not nearly enough to justify a school, when other educational facilities already exist that can fill that need, if it really exists. Remember, Erie county had the Regional Skill Center, which had a wonderful welding program, with excellent instructors, and closed because it wasn’t supported by Erie industries.
While I can understand the comments made relative to Gannon and Mercyhurst, although I don’t necessarily agree with them, I notice that Penn State Behrend wasn’t mentioned, and they turn out a number of engineers every year, and they are indeed having difficulty finding employment opportunities here in Erie. I can speak with experience of kids coming out Behrend with degrees, advanced degrees and honors, and being unable to find family sustaining wage employment in Erie.
One of our better know hospitality businesses, offered an MBA graduate a job starting at $8.50 an hour, with no benefit package, and 30 hour work week. Face it, Erie business simply does not, has not, and probably will not value education. They, for over a century, have made up for the lack of education with artificially low wage scales, and I see no effort within industry to change that. To the contrary due to global competition, the wage gap is actually accelerating, and part time employment, with no benefits increasing.
I am pro education, and willing to consider a CC, but only if I can see what they intend to produce, and some indication of what the market for that product is. I am not willing to provide a 2/3 subsidy for an education that doesn’t lead anywhere. So far, the reports I have read illustrate no specific curriculum that is not available elsewhere. If that remains the case, the CC is nothing more than subsidized education, in competition with existing institutions.
I don’t necessarily blame government in this case, because I too have heard some of the comments made from within the business community. But at the same time, I have directly challenged a couple of vocal supporters of the CC to tell me how many graduates they would commit to hiring, on an annual basis. Not one indicated being able to commit to hiring anyone, let alone hiring on an annual basis. Most comments were along the line of advancing needs they supposedly heard from someone else, and were unwilling to name. Or, they would indicate a single position they had available, where they had experienced a lot turnover, and made the assumption the turnover rate was due to a lack of education. When challenged on that assumption, none could give any legitimate justification for the assumption, and I came away thinking it was an easy way of not dealing with either a lack of internal mentoring, or simply bad initial hiring practices.
And finally, another thread talked about the Erie networking that goes on, and it is true, that in Erie it is much more important who you know than what you know, both for initial employment, then for advancement. Unfortunate, but a fact none the less.
If business truly wants and needs this facility, at this point we should not still be talking about what programs would be offered, and we would have hiring commitments in place from a number these businesses. As the Skill Center demonstrated, taxpayers can be put on the hook for an enormous amount of money, well intended to assist business and industry, and come away with no return on that investment.
In my opinion, no commitments, no facility. No reasonable, documented, rationale for a taxpayer return on investment, no wasting the money.