One problem with hiring juniors (from an employer perspective) is that they take a while to get trained up, then leave after 1-3 years, meaning that they require investment which never gets paid back. You can argue that the company should give them raises to keep them, but it goes against the zeitgeist (so it’s tough), and also means that there’s no advantage to hiring juniors.
This seems like a stable (though undesirable) equilibrium, and I do not have a solution.
seniors will retire or die off is what is short-sighted. I have been a senior for the past 10 years and am planning on hacking another 10-15, don’t need money any longer, just love what I do. 60% of just my team is the same (give or take few years)
Most companies are trying to hire people with more than 2-4 years of experience, but not 0-2 years of experience. They are far from losing all candidates to death or retirement.
The problem is that labor laws and practical considerations make it so that most other options are infeasible and/or illegal. Business model innovation in employment is basically illegal.
Professional sports take interesting and varied approaches to the subject, but even they are facing challenges (see ‘free transfers’ in the European football market).
It’s not just the zeitgeist. It’s problematic when relatively junior employees start to overtake more senior employees on salary (because word will go around). And raising everyone’s salaries often isn’t an option either, obviously.
This seems like a stable (though undesirable) equilibrium, and I do not have a solution.