Why did teenagers stop getting jobs?

[Malthus]

Many of the people I knew who had jobs in HS stayed doing those types of jobs thereafter. Dunno if that is cause-and-effect though -- most middle-class or above type people no longer positively require their kids to work at such joe-jobs (what they require is that their kids do stuff to pad their future resumes).

The people who would be satisfied with crap jobs are also going to have problems studying for 4 or more years in University in the hope of obtaining a good job.  The problem of delayed gratification doesnt go away.  In my case having crap jobs before and during University motivated me to do well in University.  There was definitely a causal relationship.

But the situation with my kids will be different.  They will not have to work as I did.  They will have the opportunity to spend their time doing other things.  The issue is how will they spend that time.  If they want to simply lay about then I will go all Stonewall on their ass.  But if they use their time for productive ends then I will let them be.  I hope I have instilled in them the motivation to do that.

The thing is this generation and the possibilities open to it are much different than when I was growing up.  I do not know enough to prejudge what they should be doing.  So I dont think I should arbitrarily say you must get a crap job like I did, its the only way!  They may well find a better way than I did.  At least that is the hope.  Those were after all really crappy jobs.

Sure, I can agree with that.

Seems to me that many people think that having the same experiences they had as kids is character building.

My own dad thought that isolated wilderness living was character building, because he did a lot of that as a kid. The main effect of being forced to live in a log cabin and pick bugs off of vegitables every summer as a kid was to insulate me forever from any hippy-dippy notions about the essential benevolence of nature ... 

[crazy canuck]

A manager is not an entry level position.  The people the manager manages at a Burger King or Gamestop are entry level employees.

True, but on the other hand, along parallel lines to the farm argument, historically, kids worked in family businesses- we're at a point where family-owned small business are a dying breed; non-family small businesses and larger family-owned businesses are heavily pressured not to hire relatives or minors.  The big corporations holding onto the bulk of the entry-level jobs are at the same time loathe to work around student schedules- around here, BJ's has actually told interviewees that they will not accomodate students in scheduling and that they'll just have to quit when school begins again.

That is a good point.

It reminds me of a case a number of years ago involving a large employer in a small community.  The employer had a policy of hiring the teenage children of their employees during the summer as casual labour - really it was a good will gesture toward the employees to create work for their kids during the summer in a town where there were not really any other employment opportunites.

This practice had gone on for a number of decades.  Then one day someone from outside the town applied for one of the casual summer jobs, didnt get it, made a human rights complaint alleging they were being descriminated against because they were not related to one of the employees. 

The case effectively brought an end to the summer jobs program. 

[PDH]

You know what builds character?  No, not a job but rather a stint in the CCC - bring back the New Deal full employment.

[Ideologue]

A manager is not an entry level position.  The people the manager manages at a Burger King or Gamestop are entry level employees.

True, but on the other hand, along parallel lines to the farm argument, historically, kids worked in family businesses- we're at a point where family-owned small business are a dying breed; non-family small businesses and larger family-owned businesses are heavily pressured not to hire relatives or minors.  The big corporations holding onto the bulk of the entry-level jobs are at the same time loathe to work around student schedules- around here, BJ's has actually told interviewees that they will not accomodate students in scheduling and that they'll just have to quit when school begins again.

That is a good point.

It reminds me of a case a number of years ago involving a large employer in a small community.  The employer had a policy of hiring the teenage children of their employees during the summer as casual labour - really it was a good will gesture toward the employees to create work for their kids during the summer in a town where there were not really any other employment opportunites.

This practice had gone on for a number of decades.  Then one day someone from outside the town applied for one of the casual summer jobs, didnt get it, made a human rights complaint alleging they were being descriminated against because they were not related to one of the employees. 

The case effectively brought an end to the summer jobs program.

Nepotism is against the law?

[Stonewall]

The fear, whether well-founded or not, is that this "character building" construction or table-waiting job could easily morph into little Jimmy's full-time occupation, as Jimmy appreciates the cash and respect that having a job entails, forms his friendships with other construction workers and table-waiters (who have far more adult real-life experience than his callow schoolchums), does worse in school than his jobless peers because his after-school time is spent working rather than studying, and decides school is just a waste of his time.

It's the old deferred-gratification problem. A job does give instant gratification in terms of money and self-respect it is true, but it can make putting up with years of schooling to possibly get an even better career option that much more difficult (or conversely, can demonstrate the horrors of manual labour and thus cause folks to value their education!)

Many of the people I knew who had jobs in HS stayed doing those types of jobs thereafter. Dunno if that is cause-and-effect though -- most middle-class or above type people no longer positively require their kids to work at such joe-jobs (what they require is that their kids do stuff to pad their future resumes).

Eminently fair point.

[crazy canuck]

Nepotism is against the law?

That was the effective ruling of the case yes.

[Ideologue]

Nepotism is against the law?

That was the effective ruling of the case yes.

Huh.

[crazy canuck]

Nepotism is against the law?

That was the effective ruling of the case yes.

Huh.

You are going to have to learn to communicate a bit better.  Perhaps you should get a job before attempting the practice of law.

[Stonewall]

But the situation with my kids will be different.  They will not have to work as I did.  They will have the opportunity to spend their time doing other things.  The issue is how will they spend that time.  If they want to simply lay about then I will go all Stonewall on their ass.  But if they use their time for productive ends then I will let them be.  I hope I have instilled in them the motivation to do that.

The thing is this generation and the possibilities open to it are much different than when I was growing up.  I do not know enough to prejudge what they should be doing.  So I dont think I should arbitrarily say you must get a crap job like I did, its the only way!  They may well find a better way than I did.  At least that is the hope.  Those were after all really crappy jobs.

As my wife and I start trying to make our family, this is inevitably one of our conversation pieces.  How much to give them.  How much to make them self-reliant.  At what point does giving cross the line into spoiling.  The conclusion that we have come to is that at age 15 or 16, they need to be weened off from us.  If they are not playing sports or other kinds of organized activities, then they need to get a job.  Maybe its only 8-10 hours a week.  Maybe its cutting grass.  Or lifeguarding at a pool, but they need to be responsible, in some limited sense, for themselves.

That is our conclusion....today.  Tomorrow it might have changed completely.

[DontSayBanana]

Oh yeah, grass-cutting reminded me of another local aberration: having both a federal medium-security prison as well as the largest state prison in NJ in my county means a disproportionately large number of "landscaping" businesses; it's a local favorite for potential parolees who are having a hard time meeting employment requirements.

[MadImmortalMan]

But the situation with my kids will be different.  They will not have to work as I did.  They will have the opportunity to spend their time doing other things.  The issue is how will they spend that time.  If they want to simply lay about then I will go all Stonewall on their ass.  But if they use their time for productive ends then I will let them be.  I hope I have instilled in them the motivation to do that.

The thing is this generation and the possibilities open to it are much different than when I was growing up.  I do not know enough to prejudge what they should be doing.  So I dont think I should arbitrarily say you must get a crap job like I did, its the only way!  They may well find a better way than I did.  At least that is the hope.  Those were after all really crappy jobs.

As my wife and I start trying to make our family, this is inevitably one of our conversation pieces.  How much to give them.  How much to make them self-reliant.  At what point does giving cross the line into spoiling.  The conclusion that we have come to is that at age 15 or 16, they need to be weened off from us.  If they are not playing sports or other kinds of organized activities, then they need to get a job.  Maybe its only 8-10 hours a week.  Maybe its cutting grass.  Or lifeguarding at a pool, but they need to be responsible, in some limited sense, for themselves.

That is our conclusion....today.  Tomorrow it might have changed completely.

You could follow my parents' method--borrow as much money from your kids' income as you can and never pay them back. They will leave the house asap just to be able to keep their paychecks. Works wonders for building self-sufficiency.

[derspiess]

Everyone should wash dishes or wait tables or work construction for a summer or two.  Builds character.

As cliched as it sounds, I agree 100%.  The only thing I'd avoid having my kid do is work in fast food.  I did when I was 16-17 and it was a horrible experience-- possibly a bit *too* humbling. 

[derspiess]

I worked at Rax but I wasn't allowed to use the meat slicer until I turned 18. 

I worked there, too  

[Eddie Teach]

I ate there. I liked those alligator shaped cups they had. 

[The Larch]

And what about the other part of the graph? Why are people who should be retired still working?

As for teenage jobs, there's not much that I can say, it's something that it's not done at all over here in the way that you describe it, which seems to be pretty idiosincratic. Anyway the tired old line of "young kids these days are too soft, unlike us who are carved out of fucking granite" seems so intelectually lazy that it embarrases me to read so many of you uttering it.