|
Some
Virginians
were astounded in early December at news
reports that concluded 44 percent of new jobs
created in Virginia
from 1990 to 2001 had been filled by immigrants.
They shouldn't have been surprised, but they should
feel chagrined that
Virginia
businesses, political leaders and educational
institutions couldn't respond faster and more
efficiently to secure more of these new job
opportunities for Virginians. According to a new
report from the Joint Legislative Audit and Review
Commission (JLARC), regrettably, the Commonwealth
still is not in a position to do much about it. New
proposals from Gov. Mark R. Warner may change that.
More
than 13 million immigrants came to the United States
in the last decade, according to a Center for Labor
Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.
Eight million joined the labor force, supplementing
American workers in wage-sensitive jobs, but more
impressively helping expand employment in highly
skilled jobs that pay high wages, such as in the
technology industry. The analysis shows nearly one
in four held a technical, managerial or professional
job. Immigrants also had an above-average share of
the nation's jobs in engineering, computer science
and the physical sciences.
In
1997, in the midst of the last boom, the State
Council of Higher Education in Virginia (SCHEV)
provided statistics that showed the number of
graduates in engineering, science and technology
majors at Virginia colleges and universities
actually were declining. Strangely enough,
the number of psychology graduates was growing,
which seemed to indicate that Virginia was better
prepared to deal with worry about the problem than
to solve it.
The
Northern Virginia Technology Council and Virginia's
Center for Innovative Technology found in a survey
of technology companies that 19,000 technology jobs
that paid twice the average wage of other jobs in
Virginia were going unfilled. Pressure began to
build on the federal government to boost the number
of H1-B professional visas issued to foreign
workers, something the federal government eventually
did.
The
Commonwealth responded methodically, as is its
habit. Then-Gov. George Allen convened a workforce
study group only weeks before leaving office. The
General Assembly, led by representatives, such as
Sen. Charles Hawkins, R-Chatham, from regions with
stubborn unemployment, pressed for comprehensive
workforce reform in 1998. New legislation created
the Virginia Workforce Council to provide strategic
planning for overall workforce efforts. Policy
advocates hoped the council would produce an
accurate look at the shape of the Virginia
workforce, a collective best judgment of what Virginia
would need its workforce to look like in the future
(and adjust that judgment regularly) and, most
importantly, suggestions on how to get what
Virginia
needs in place in time.
The
Virginia Community College System (VCCS) won the
interagency battle to staff the Virginia Workforce
Council and did create a new vice chancellor
position for workforce. One of the initiatives that followed, through the
leadership of Del. Jim Scott, D-Fairfax, was the
Advantage Virginia Scholarship Program (AVIP),
adopted and amended last in the 2001 session. Under
that program, the Virginia Workforce Council would
certify each year which jobs were in high demand in Virginia.
Community colleges and universities, in turn, would
inform the State Council on Higher Education in Virginia
which of their two-year and four-year programs would
qualify students for employment in those high-demand
jobs. AVIP then would award annual scholarships to
Virginians pursuing degrees in those programs.
For each year of a scholarship, the student recipient would
agree to work one year in Virginia
after graduating. If not, the scholarship would
revert to a student loan that would be repaid.
Finally, because the program would deliver qualified
Virginia
applicants to companies and institutions, it was
expected that business would help capitalize the
scholarship pool. As a financial bonus for the
state, more jobs filled would mean more tax revenue
for state and local governments. That was the
theory.
The
AVIP program still could help deliver qualified
Virginians into Virginia
jobs by connecting the dots in workforce
development. Alas, good times, then budget problems,
have kept the program from being funded. Moreover,
the federal government countered with its own
Workforce Investment Act reforms in 1998, which in
the intervening years sidetracked additional
progress by state government.
So
fast-forward to 2002. The JLARC staff review
released in November concluded that "Virginia lacks a coherent, coordinated system of workforce
training" and that "22 state-administered
workforce programs are fragmented and spread out
among ten state agencies with no formal method for
coordination." After five years and in
dramatically different economic circumstances, the
Commonwealth is still at square one, reorganized
though it may be.
These
programs represented about $255.8 million in
federal, state and local funds in FY2002. Statistics
in the JLARC study, moreover, show Virginia
devoting 10 percent less to in workforce training
programs in 2002 than in 1999 at the exact time
economic slowdown and rising unemployment could be
seen as demanding more effort. Both the federal and
state governments are disinvesting. Federal dollars
for
Virginia
workforce training programs are down $33.6 million
in 2002 from 1999 levels. Commonwealth dollars are
down $4.2 million in the same period. Is anyone
putting in more funds? It turns out local
governments in Virginia
more than doubled resources dedicated to workforce
training from $8.5 million in 1999 to $17.9 million
this year.
The
JLARC study, like other inquiries into workforce
challenges, has a number of different ideas on how
the Commonwealth can better organize, coordinate,
administer and manage programs. On the laundry list
are Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program
partnerships with one-stop service centers,
independent staff for the Virginia Workforce
Council, minimum standards for training providers,
evaluation measures for local workforce investment
boards and one-stop service centers, even a new
state agency for workforce training and development.
One
could be highly creative and suggest that worker
training programs be consolidated with education in
one secretariat – call it Secretary for Education
and Labor. The Secretary could be tasked with
pulling down barriers between educational and
training programs so an individual could move
seamlessly through her or his life-long learning,
job-changing experience. Why, for example, are the
high school graduation and public college and
university entrance requirements separate processes?
The student is the same. Why are professional
credentials and college degrees so separate and
distinct? The future worker and current student are
the same person. Why can an unemployed worker take
advantage of new one-stop training services mandated
under the Workforce Investment Act, but individuals
coming off Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
cannot? Moving citizens into
high-wage, high-skill jobs is the same
objective.
Suggesting
a new secretariat for employment and worker training
does not mean Commerce and Trade Secretary Michael
Schewel isn't doing a good job. To the contrary,
Secretary Schewel is considered to be one of the
stars of the Warner administration. In fact, it is
much more likely that workforce agency
consolidations ahead will result in a Secretary of
Commerce and Workforce. Such consolidations would
help Secretary Schewel and the General Assembly not
only achieve more efficiencies and effectiveness in
workforce training programs, but also elevate the
importance of human capital as an economic
development strategy.
Governor
Warner suggested last week that workforce training
consolidation and reform will be part of his effort
to make the most dramatic, sweeping changes in state
government in 30 years. But the administration and
Virginia General Assembly will miss the mark in 2003
if workforce training policy proceeds simply from
the JLARC understanding of the challenge. The JLARC
report suggests, "Developing and maintaining a
quality workforce is one component of sustained
economic development." Wrong.
In
a knowledge economy, a quality workforce is the
single most critical component for sustained
economic development. Smart, skilled people are both
drivers and magnets. Regardless of their sector in
the service-driven economy, private businesses start
with the same core objective – recruit and retain
the best workers. The number of immigrants who
helped build the economic future of the Commonwealth
over the last decade provides just the latest proof.
--
December
9, 2002
|
