Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Reportneworks.nebraska.gov/admin/gsipub/htmlarea/...Central Nebraska Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Report PUBLISHED SPRING 2017 5 Introduction

KearneyHIRING AND TRAINING NEEDS REPORT

Central NebraskaPUBLISHED SPRING 2017

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

2 Nebraska Departments of Labor and Economic Development

Table of ContentsList of Figures & Tables 3Executive Summary 4Introduction 5Results 7

Characteristics of Businesses 7Labor Availability and Expansion 7Retiring Workers 7Training 8Benefits Offered 9

Current Workers 10

Deficiencies

10Requirements

11Applicants 12

Employment History 12Competency 13Hiring Difficulty 14

Profile of Selected Occupations 17Conclusion

Appendix

2022

Revised: 4/8/19

Equal Opportunity Program/Employer. TDD: 1.800.833.7352Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities.

3Central Nebraska — Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Report PUBLISHED SPRING 2017

Figures & TablesTABLE 1 Profile of Responding Businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5TABLE 2 Employment Characteristics of Responding Businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6FIGURE 1 Job Openings at Business Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6FIGURE 2.1 Major Expansion: Issues with Labor Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7FIGURE 2.2 Major Expansion: Limitations due to Labor Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7FIGURE 3 Concern about Potential Loss of Skills and Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7FIGURE 4 Taken Steps to Address Potential Skill Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8FIGURE 5 Methods of Addressing Potential Skill Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8FIGURE 6 Type of Training Provided to Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8TABLE 3 Type of Training by Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9TABLE 4 Type of Training by Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9FIGURE 7.1 Benefit Offerings for Full-Time Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10FIGURE 7.2 Benefit Offerings for Part-Time Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10FIGURE 8 Education Requirements of Current Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10FIGURE 9 Work Experience Requirements of Current Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11FIGURE 10 Skill Level Requirements of Current Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

FIGURE 11 Skill Deficiencies of Current Workforce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12FIGURE 12 Applicants’ Current Employment Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12FIGURE 13 Employer Hesitation Regarding Non-Employed Applicants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12FIGURE 14 Amount of Applicants with Experience in Related Industry or Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13FIGURE 15 Competency of Typical Applicant Pool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13FIGURE 16 Less Than Adequate Competency of Typical Applicant Pool for Selected Industries . . . . . . . . . . 14FIGURE 17.1 Difficulty Finding Workers by Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14FIGURE 17.2 Difficulty Finding Workers by Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15FIGURE 18 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15TABLE 5 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers - Top Responding Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16TABLE 6 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers - Most Often Hired Occupations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17TABLE 7 Profile of Selected Occupations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-19TABLE 8.1 Key Results - Business Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20TABLE 8.2 Key Results - Applicant Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20TABLE 8.3 Key Results - Characteristics of Current Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21


Executive SummaryThe Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs gathered information from business owners, managers, supervisors, and

human resource personnel about Kearney area labor issues and workforce needs. Responses received from employers in the Kearney

area were most often from businesses with less than 50 employees in service-producing industries that have been operating for 10 years

or more. Nearly all responding employers (94.5%) reported that they hired or tried to hire at least one new worker in the past two years.

Nearly 54% of the responding businesses said they have at least one job opening at their location, and businesses with job openings have

an average of over two positions available.

Many employers expressed issues with labor availability when considering business

expansion. Over 89% of businesses reported labor availability issues either would be

present or might be present if asked to consider a major expansion. Over 56% of these

employers then reported labor availability issues would limit their ability to undertake a

major expansion.

Businesses also reported the occupations they have hired or tried to hire, and the

reasons it was difficult to find workers to fill those positions. More than 79% of Kearney

area businesses stated it was difficult to find workers, and the most common reasons

businesses gave were not receiving enough applicants and applicants’ poor work

history, lack of work experience, and lack of occupation-specific skills.

Over the course of the survey, employers were prompted with a list of skills and asked

to rate the competency of their applicant pool (see “Figure 15 Competency of Typical

Applicant Pool”). Employers also used the same list of skills to report whether there

were deficiencies in their current workforce (see “Figure 11 Percentage of Employers

Reporting a Deficiency in the Majority of their Workforce”). This list included a variety

of skills including “soft skills” (e.g., work ethic, attitude), basic education (e.g., basic

math, verbal and written communication), and advanced skills (e.g., critical thinking,

advanced computer skills). While businesses did report that lack of occupation-specific

skills was a reason for difficulty finding workers, no more than a 41% of businesses

reported any skill as less than adequate in the applicant pool, and a majority of

businesses rated their applicant pool as adequate in 7 of the 18 prompted skills.

Regarding perceptions of the current workforce, no more than 51% of businesses

reported a deficiency in any listed skill.

In order to broaden and improve the

candidate pool, businesses may need to

explore a variety of strategies. Increasing

the amount of training, pay, and benefits

provided to workers may improve the

quantity and quality of applicants for

open positions and allow for business

expansion in the Kearney area. Further

recommendations are provided in the

Kearney Skills Gap Report.

Survey Area Map Central Nebraska

Custer

Hall

Clay

YorkDawson Buffalo

Gosper Phelps Kearney

Franklin

Boone

Platte

Polk

Furnas

Valley

Harlan

Blaine

Adams

Loup

Thayer

Howard

Greeley

Fillmore

Nance

Webster

Merrick

Nuckolls

Sherman

Hamilton

Frontier

Garfield Wheeler Madison

Antelope

Lincoln

Logan

Red Willow

Butler

Thomas

Saline

Seward

Jefferson

Stanton

Nebraska

Kansas

Kearney Area


IntroductionThis report discusses the results from a survey of employers in the Kearney area titled

the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs. This study was conducted

by the Nebraska Department of Labor (NDOL) in collaboration with the Nebraska

Department of Economic Development and the Bureau of Business Research at the

University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training

Needs is designed to gather detailed information on the hiring and training needs and

priorities of Kearney area businesses. Specifically, information was gathered from

employers about the types of occupations they are searching for and hiring; the types

of degrees, certifications, and skills that occupations require; and the types of training

they provide.

The Kearney survey area included all or parts of seven counties in the central region

of Nebraska, including Buffalo, Dawson, Franklin, Gosper, Harlan, Kearney, and Phelps

counties. The survey was mailed to all privately-owned businesses with 10 or more

employees in the Kearney area. The sample of Nebraska businesses was taken from

the 2015 fourth quarter NDOL Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. The final

survey list included 744 establishment locations throughout the Nebraska counties

listed above, although the majority (434) were located in Buffalo County.

Table 1 Profile of Responding Businesses

Size of Business

Small (10-49 employees) 86.0%Mid-size (50 - 99 employees) 7.6%Large (100 or more employees) 6.4%

Industry Groups

Goods-Producing 19.2%Manufacturing 7.2%Construction 6.5%Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting 5.4%Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 0.2%

Service-Producing 80.8%

Retail Trade 20.7%Accommodation and Food Services 17.0%Health Care and Social Assistance 12.4%Wholesale Trade 7.2%Finance and Insurance 4.7%Transportation and Warehousing 3.7%

A total of 335 complete surveys were

received as a result of the three mailings,

for a 45% response rate. Table 1 displays

the distribution of responding businesses

regarding business size and industry

groupings. A majority of responses

came from smaller businesses (less

than 50 employees) in service-producing

industries. Specifically, 86% of respondents

were businesses with fewer than 50

employees. These were designated as

small businesses in the discussion of the

survey. Another 7.6% of businesses had

between 50 and 99 employees. These were

designated as mid-size businesses. The

remaining 6.4% of respondents were large

employers with 100 or more employees.

Goods-producing businesses accounted

for 19.2% of respondents. The goods-

producing category primarily includes

responses from businesses in the

manufacturing industry (7.2% of Kearney

respondents). Service-producing

businesses accounted for 80.8% of

respondents. Service-producing is a broad

category which includes responses from

businesses in the retail trade industry

(20.7% of Kearney respondents). The

service-producing sector includes a large

majority of the businesses in the economy

employing 10 or more individuals as well

as a large majority of the respondents to

the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and

Training Needs.

For all of the Central Nebraska reports, visit:

dol.nebraska.gov/las

http://dol.nebraska.gov/las


Table 2 shows several key employment

characteristics of the survey respondents.

Given the focus on establishments with 10

or more employees, it was expected that

the sample would primarily include older,

established firms. It is notable that 80.7% of

respondents had been in business for more

than 10 years, while just 11.7% had been in

business for six to 10 years and 7.5% had

been in business for one to five years.

Based on a simple average across the

responding businesses, 66.9% of jobs were

full-time positions compared to 32.3% part-

time. Responding businesses also were

very active in the labor market, with 94.5%

of respondents reporting that their business

hired or tried to hire employees during the

last two years.

As seen in Figure 1, 53.9% of responding

businesses had at least one job opening at

their location. Considering firms with one

job opening or more, the average number of

open positions at these locations was 2.6

jobs.

Nearly all responding businesses had been

active in hiring over the last two years.

Survey respondents were typically small,

established firms, which primarily provided

full-time and year-round employment.

Therefore, the respondents were an

appropriate group for study in order to

provide insights about hiring and training

needs in the Kearney area.

Table 2 Employment Characteristics of Responding Businesses

Measure

Years in Operation

<1 year 0.0%1-5 years 7.5%6-10 years 11.7%>10 years 80.7%

Employment Status of Current Employees

Full-Time 66.9%Part-Time 32.3%Seasonal 4.7%

Hiring

At Least One Job Opening 53.9%

Average Current Job Openings 2.6Hired or Tried to Hire Last Two Years 94.5%

Figure 1 Job Openings at Business Location

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5+

3-5

1-2

Zero

Additional Analyses p. 6

46.1%

32.6%

10.2%

11.1%


ResultsCharacteristics of Businesses

Labor Availability and Expansion

Figure 2.1 Major Expansion: Issues with Labor Availability

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Strongly considered

Somewhat considered

Slightly considered

Not considered

at all

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5 YearsNext Year

Very

Somewhat

Slightly

Not at all

Figures 1 - 3 p. 7Figure 1

Figure 3

10.6%22.5%

16.2%

29.3%

41.4%25.7%

31.8%

22.6%

Figure 1.2

56.4%

32.3%

11.3%

Figure 2

18.6%

24.6%

13.4%

43.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NoMaybeYes

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

65.5%

23.8%

10.8%

NoMaybeYes

This section of results shows the importance of labor force issues and the challenges

presented to businesses facing expansion. Figure 2.1 shows the role of worker

availability in economic development. Specifically, the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring

and Training Needs asked employers the following question: “If asked to consider a

possible major expansion at this location, would issues with labor availability such

as difficulty finding workers, or a need to raise wages, be present?” A majority of

businesses (65.5%) reported that issues with labor availability would be present in the

Kearney area if they were asked to consider an expansion. Nearly 24% of businesses

suggested that availability issues might be present and 10.8% reported that they would

not have labor availability issues. Responses from different industries and occupations

were varied, and particularly challenged industries and occupations will be examined in

this report.

Figure 2.2 Major Expansion: Limitations Due to Labor Availability

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Strongly considered

Somewhat considered

Slightly considered

Not considered

at all

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5 YearsNext Year

Very

Somewhat

Slightly

Not at all


Figure 3

10.6%22.5%

16.2%

29.3%

41.4%25.7%

31.8%

22.6%

Figure 1.2

56.4%

32.3%

11.3%

Figure 2

18.6%

24.6%

13.4%

43.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NoMaybeYes

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

65.5%

23.8%

10.8%

NoMaybeYes

A follow-up question was posed to

businesses that responded ‘yes’ or

‘maybe’ to the previous inquiry: “Would

issues with labor availability limit your

ability to undertake a major expansion

at this location?” Results indicated that

labor availability issues would limit

56.4% of businesses, might limit 32.3%

of businesses, and not limit 11.3% of

businesses (see Figure 2.2).

Retiring Workers

This survey asked respondents several

questions about retiring workers and plans

to mitigate a potential skills gap. More

specifically, the Central Nebraska Survey of

Hiring and Training Needs asked employers,

“How concerned are you about the potential

loss of skills and experience that may result

from workers retiring from this location?”

Each Kearney area respondent was then

prompted to think about the question in

terms of the next year and in the next five

years (see Figure 3 below).

Figure 3 Concern about Potential Loss of Skills and Experience

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Strongly considered

Somewhat considered

Slightly considered

Not considered

at all

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5 YearsNext Year

Very

Somewhat

Slightly

Not at all


Figure 3

10.6%22.5%

16.2%

29.3%

41.4%25.7%

31.8%

22.6%

Figure 1.2

56.4%

32.3%

11.3%

Figure 2

18.6%

24.6%

13.4%

43.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NoMaybeYes

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

65.5%

23.8%

10.8%

NoMaybeYes

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Strongly considered

Somewhat considered

Slightly considered

Not considered

at all

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5 YearsNext Year

Very

Somewhat

Slightly

Not at all


Figure 3

10.6%22.5%

16.2%

29.3%

41.4%25.7%

31.8%

22.6%

Figure 1.2

56.4%

32.3%

11.3%

Figure 2

18.6%

24.6%

13.4%

43.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NoMaybeYes

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

65.5%

23.8%

10.8%

NoMaybeYes


Results

When considering the next year, over 41%

of businesses reported that they were not

at all concerned, and 10.6% of respondents

were very concerned about a loss of skills

resulting from retiring workers. However,

when considering concern for loss of

skills from retiring workers in the next five

years, 25.7% of respondents were not at all

concerned and 22.5% were very concerned.

These results suggest that employers don’t

foresee skills gaps with loss of skills in

experience due to retiring workers in the

next year, but they do expect problems

resulting from retiring workers in the next

five years.

Businesses were then asked if they had

taken steps to address the potential skill

gaps that may occur due to the retirement

of workers. As seen in Figure 4, nearly 52%

of Kearney area businesses answered that

they had addressed the loss of skills due to

retiring workers, and 48.1% responded that

either they hadn’t taken action or plan to

take action to address skill gaps resulting

from retiring workers.

Figure 4 Taken Steps to Address Potential Skill Gaps

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

No, but plan toNoYes


51.9%

40.8%

7.2%

Figure 5 Methods of Addressing Potential Skill Gaps

Figures 4 & 5 p. 8

Figure 4

Figure 5

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Other

Encouraging workers to delay retirement

Mentoring/Leadership programs

Formal succession planning

Retain workers on a part time/consultant basis

Hiring workers with the skills that will be lost

Mentoring workers through on-the-job training

Training workers with the skills that will be lost

1.1%

20.4%

16.4%

12.2%

11.3%

8.0%

4.5%

26.1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

College/community college course

License

N/A: No additional training provided

Other

Class but no certification

Certification course

Training provided by other workers or supervisor 68.2%

17.3%

13.5%

11.4%

9.5%

6.7%

4.5%

A follow-up question asked, “How is management at this location addressing potential

skill gaps that may result from workers retiring in the near future?” Of the employers

responding “yes” to the previous question, the most common answer selected was to

train current workers in the skills that will be lost (26.1%) when other workers retire (See

Figure 5). Mentoring workers through on-the-job training and hiring new workers with

the needed skills were the next most common means of replacing skills lost resulting

from retiring workers.

Training

When describing occupations that employers have recently hired or tried to hire,

respondents were asked, “Beyond basic employee orientation, what type of training

is provided to workers?” As seen in Figure 6, the most common type of training was

training that is provided by other workers or a supervisor (68.2%), and this type of

training was most common regardless of occupation or industry (See Table 3 and

Table 4).

Figure 6 Type of Training Provided to Workers

Figures 4 & 5 p. 8

Figure 4

Figure 5

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Other

Encouraging workers to delay retirement

Mentoring/Leadership programs

Formal succession planning

Retain workers on a part time/consultant basis

Hiring workers with the skills that will be lost

Mentoring workers through on-the-job training

Training workers with the skills that will be lost

1.1%

20.4%

16.4%

12.2%

11.3%

8.0%

4.5%

26.1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

College/community college course

License

N/A: No additional training provided

Other

Class but no certification

Certification course

Training provided by other workers or supervisor 68.2%

17.3%

13.5%

11.4%

9.5%

6.7%

4.5%

9Central Nebraska Labor Availability Study — Kearney

Results

Table 3 Type of Training by Industry

Type of Training Accommodation and Food Services

Retail Trade

Health Care and Social Assistance

Class but no certification 8.4% 11.6% 18.9%

License 0.9% 7.1% 9.8%

Certification course 22.4% 20.5% 18.9%

College/community college course 0.0% 6.3% 7.4%

Training provided by other workers or supervisor 52.3% 73.2% 59.0%

N/A: No additional training provided 14.0% 8.9% 4.9%

Other 8.4% 12.5% 13.9%

Table 4 Type of Training by Occupation

Type of Training Food Preparation and Serving

Related

Sales and Related

Office and Administrative

Support

Class but no certification 9.3% 11.6% 11.3%

License 0.0% 8.0% 3.9%

Certification course 18.7% 14.6% 17.0%

College/community college course 0.0% 4.5% 1.0%

Training provided by other workers or supervisor 55.2% 75.5% 71.3%

N/A: No additional training provided 15.5% 10.1% 6.0%

Other 3.8% 9.3% 10.7%

Only the top three responding industries are displayed in Table 3, and shown in Table 4

are the top three occupations that employers most often hired or tried to hire in the last

two years. Results showed that often no additional training was provided to workers in

food preparation and serving-related occupations (15.5%). Nearly 19% of workers in the

healthcare and social assistance industry provided license training or a college course.

And 20.5% of those working in the retail trade industry were provided with a certification

course.

Benefits Offered

Detailed information was also gathered

about the benefits offered to workers.

Respondents were asked, “About how many

workers at this location are offered the

following benefits?” Figure 7.1 and Figure

7.2 display the percent of respondents that

offered specific benefits to full-time and

part-time workers. Over 91% of employers

responded that they offered all or some

of their full-time workers paid vacation,

and 81.4% percent of respondents offered

all or some of their full-time workers paid

holidays. More than 67% of businesses

responded that all or some of their full-time

workers were offered retirement benefits

and 67.3% offered all or some of their full-

time workers health insurance. However,

58.6% of respondents offered vision

insurance to none of their full-time workers.

Furthermore, over 72.2% of respondents

reported that tuition reimbursement was

offered to none of the full-time workers at

their firms.

As would be expected, the percent of firms

that offered benefits to part-time workers

was substantially less than for full-time

workers. Only 27.3% of Kearney businesses

reported offering retirement benefits to

all or some of their part-time workers.

Furthermore, 31.9% of firms offered paid

holidays and 29.3% offered paid vacation

to all or some of their part-time employees.

However, 67.4% of respondents offered

part-time workers a flexible work schedule.


Results

Figure 7.1 Benefit Offerings for Full-Time Workers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Some

All

Vision Insurance

Tuition Reimbursement

Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance

Flexible Work Schedule

Dental Insurance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

No WorkersSome WorkersAll Workers

Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Master's degree or higher

Bachelor's degree

Associate degree

Technical/Vocational degree

High school diploma/GED

No minimum education required

Figure 6 & 7

44.7%

59.4%

67.7%

51.6%

77.7%

58.8%

32.4%

86.8%

72.2%

14.2%

8.8%

10.1%3.1%

17.1%

38.3%

58.6%3.1%

10.7%

8.1%

7.9%

13.7%

7.3%

32.7%

18.6%

41.1%

41.0%

50.4%4.9%

35.2%23.8%

88.0%6.6%

5.0%

20.7%

8.2%

11.2%

11.7%

16.5%

15.4%

1.4%

4.4%

6.0%5.6%

8.3%

2.3%

6.0%

12.8%

11.9%

5.5%

45.5%21.9%

32.6%

86.8%

68.1%

82.2%

70.7%

72.7%

96.3%

87.3%

88.4%

42.7%

5.7%

4.6%

4.8%

1.3%

40.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Some

All

Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%


Bachelor's degree

Associate degree




Figure 6 & 7

44.7%

59.4%

67.7%

51.6%

77.7%

58.8%

32.4%

86.8%

72.2%

14.2%

8.8%

10.1%3.1%

17.1%

38.3%

58.6%3.1%

10.7%

8.1%

7.9%

13.7%

7.3%

32.7%

18.6%

41.1%

41.0%

50.4%4.9%

35.2%23.8%

88.0%6.6%

5.0%

20.7%

8.2%

11.2%

11.7%

16.5%

15.4%

1.4%

4.4%

6.0%5.6%

8.3%

2.3%

6.0%

12.8%

11.9%

5.5%

45.5%21.9%

32.6%

86.8%

68.1%

82.2%

70.7%

72.7%

96.3%

87.3%

88.4%

42.7%

5.7%

4.6%

4.8%

1.3%

40.9%

Figure 7.2 Benefit Offerings for Part-Time Workers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Some

All

Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%


Bachelor's degree

Associate degree




Figure 6 & 7

44.7%

59.4%

67.7%

51.6%

77.7%

58.8%

32.4%

86.8%

72.2%

14.2%

8.8%

10.1%3.1%

17.1%

38.3%

58.6%3.1%

10.7%

8.1%

7.9%

13.7%

7.3%

32.7%

18.6%

41.1%

41.0%

50.4%4.9%

35.2%23.8%

88.0%6.6%

5.0%

20.7%

8.2%

11.2%

11.7%

16.5%

15.4%

1.4%

4.4%

6.0%5.6%

8.3%

2.3%

6.0%

12.8%

11.9%

5.5%

45.5%21.9%

32.6%

86.8%

68.1%

82.2%

70.7%

72.7%

96.3%

87.3%

88.4%

42.7%

5.7%

4.6%

4.8%

1.3%

40.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Some

All

Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%


Bachelor's degree

Associate degree




Figure 6 & 7

44.7%

59.4%

67.7%

51.6%

77.7%

58.8%

32.4%

86.8%

72.2%

14.2%

8.8%

10.1%3.1%

17.1%

38.3%

58.6%3.1%

10.7%

8.1%

7.9%

13.7%

7.3%

32.7%

18.6%

41.1%

41.0%

50.4%4.9%

35.2%23.8%

88.0%6.6%

5.0%

20.7%

8.2%

11.2%

11.7%

16.5%

15.4%

1.4%

4.4%

6.0%5.6%

8.3%

2.3%

6.0%

12.8%

11.9%

5.5%

45.5%21.9%

32.6%

86.8%

68.1%

82.2%

70.7%

72.7%

96.3%

87.3%

88.4%

42.7%

5.7%

4.6%

4.8%

1.3%

40.9%

Current Workers

Requirements

Employers responded to questions about

the minimum educational attainment

and work experience that was required of

applicants and the overall skill level required

of most workers at their location.

As seen in Figure 8, the vast majority

of Kearney area businesses either had

no minimum education requirement

for applicants or required a high school

diploma or equivalent (83.6%).

Figure 8 Education Requirements of Current Workers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

None

Some

All

Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Vision Insurance


Telecommuting

Retirement

Paid Vacation

Paid Sick Leave

Paid Holidays

Health Insurance


Dental Insurance

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%


Bachelor's degree

Associate degree




Figure 6 & 7

44.7%

59.4%

67.7%

51.6%

77.7%

58.8%

32.4%

86.8%

72.2%

14.2%

8.8%

10.1%3.1%

17.1%

38.3%

58.6%3.1%

10.7%

8.1%

7.9%

13.7%

7.3%

32.7%

18.6%

41.1%

41.0%

50.4%4.9%

35.2%23.8%

88.0%6.6%

5.0%

20.7%

8.2%

11.2%

11.7%

16.5%

15.4%

1.4%

4.4%

6.0%5.6%

8.3%

2.3%

6.0%

12.8%

11.9%

5.5%

45.5%21.9%

32.6%

86.8%

68.1%

82.2%

70.7%

72.7%

96.3%

87.3%

88.4%

42.7%

5.7%

4.6%

4.8%

1.3%

40.9%


Results

Figure 9 Work Experience Requirements of Current Workers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5+ years

3-5 years

1-2 years

6 months - 1 year

6 months related experience or less

No experience required

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Not typically requiredBeginningIntermediateAdvanced

Advanced computer skillsLeadership skillsBasic math skills

CreativityWritten communication

Basic computer skillsSales skills

Critical thinking skillsAbility to problem solve

Ability to adapt to changeAbility to work independently

Verbal communicationWillingness to learn

Customer service skillsAttitude

Ability to pay attention to detailAbility to work as a team

Work ethic


57.3%

12.3%

12.6%

37.3%

32.5%

31.6%

30.1%

28.8%

25.6%

25.2%

25.2%

24.5%

23.6%

11.8%

11.1%

10.0%

9.5%

9.1%

9.0%

8.4%

3.8% 27.7%

51.2%

51.1%

59.7%

45.3%

62.1%

51.3%

55.3%

50.2%

51.8%

52.2%

32.3%

41.0%

44.5%

42.6%

50.9%

48.1%

23.5%

31.3%

32.2%

35.0%

34.5%

51.1% 11.1%

15.6%

16.8%

15.2%

11.9%

21.5%

18.3%

23.8%

22.8%

27.9%

22.2%

29.6%

10.2%

0.4%

0.8%

0.6%

10.7%

0.4%

2.0%

1.2%

1.5%

1.7%

5.2%

19.4%

9.0%

8.1%

34.4%

14.7%

45.0%

16.1%

12.2%

5.2%

0.5%

Similarly, Figure 9 displays that the majority of businesses responding to the survey

have no prior work experience requirement (57.3%). However, nearly 25% of employers

do require no more than a year of related work experience, and 17.9% of businesses do

require a year or more experience to be qualified for the position they have recently hired

or tried to hire.

Figure 10 Skill Level Requirements of Current Workers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5+ years

3-5 years

1-2 years

6 months - 1 year



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%










Work ethic


57.3%

12.3%

12.6%

37.3%

32.5%

31.6%

30.1%

28.8%

25.6%

25.2%

25.2%

24.5%

23.6%

11.8%

11.1%

10.0%

9.5%

9.1%

9.0%

8.4%

3.8% 27.7%

51.2%

51.1%

59.7%

45.3%

62.1%

51.3%

55.3%

50.2%

51.8%

52.2%

32.3%

41.0%

44.5%

42.6%

50.9%

48.1%

23.5%

31.3%

32.2%

35.0%

34.5%

51.1% 11.1%

15.6%

16.8%

15.2%

11.9%

21.5%

18.3%

23.8%

22.8%

27.9%

22.2%

29.6%

10.2%

0.4%

0.8%

0.6%

10.7%

0.4%

2.0%

1.2%

1.5%

1.7%

5.2%

19.4%

9.0%

8.1%

34.4%

14.7%

45.0%

16.1%

12.2%

5.2%

0.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5+ years

3-5 years

1-2 years

6 months - 1 year



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%










Work ethic


57.3%

12.3%

12.6%

37.3%

32.5%

31.6%

30.1%

28.8%

25.6%

25.2%

25.2%

24.5%

23.6%

11.8%

11.1%

10.0%

9.5%

9.1%

9.0%

8.4%

3.8% 27.7%

51.2%

51.1%

59.7%

45.3%

62.1%

51.3%

55.3%

50.2%

51.8%

52.2%

32.3%

41.0%

44.5%

42.6%

50.9%

48.1%

23.5%

31.3%

32.2%

35.0%

34.5%

51.1% 11.1%

15.6%

16.8%

15.2%

11.9%

21.5%

18.3%

23.8%

22.8%

27.9%

22.2%

29.6%

10.2%

0.4%

0.8%

0.6%

10.7%

0.4%

2.0%

1.2%

1.5%

1.7%

5.2%

19.4%

9.0%

8.1%

34.4%

14.7%

45.0%

16.1%

12.2%

5.2%

0.5%

As seen in Figure 10, a list of 18 skills was

provided to employers in order to rate the

overall skill level required of most workers

at their locations. This list included a variety

of skills including “soft skills” (e.g., work

ethic, attitude), basic education (e.g., basic

math, verbal and written communication),

and advanced skills (e.g., critical thinking,

advanced computer skills).

Businesses were prompted to rate the

required skill level as either beginning,

intermediate, or advanced and were given

the option, “Not typically required.” The

skills that businesses most often rated

as not typically required were advanced

computer skills (45%) sales (34.4%), and

basic computer skills (19.4%). A majority of

businesses reported that for 11 of the 18

skills listed, most workers were required to

have an intermediate skill level. Businesses

most often reported that an advanced level

of skill was required for work ethic (37.3%),

ability to work as a team (32.5%), and ability

to pay attention to detail (31.6%).

Deficiencies

Employers were asked to indicate whether

or not there were deficiencies for the

majority of their workforce in a given set

of skills. As displayed in Figure 11, of the

prompted skills, leadership (50.7%) was

most often reported as being deficient in

the workforce. However, this was the only

skill that a majority of businesses indicated

was deficient in the workforce. The

least often reported deficient skills were

willingness to learn (29.4%), basic computer

skills (25.2%), and basic math skills (18.2%).


Results

Figure 11 Percentage of Employers Reporting a Deficiency in the Majority of their Workforce

Figures 12 - 13 p. 12

Figure 13

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ManufacturingWholesale TradeRetail TradeAll Industries

80.0%79.2% 79.4% 76.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Yes

Basic math skillsBasic computer skills

Willingness to learnVerbal communication

CreativityCustomer service skills

Ability to work as a teamAbility to work independently

Advanced computer skillsWritten communication

Sales skillsAttitude

Ability to problem solveAbility to adapt to change

Ability to pay attention to detailCritical thinking skills

Work ethicLeadership skills

Figure 12

50.7%47.1%

43.1%42.7%

42.2%42.1%

38.7%37.2%

36.3%35.1%35.0%35.0%

34.5%31.0%

30.2%29.4%

25.2%18.2%

Applicants

Employment History

Respondents were asked, “When hiring, how

much does your business consider whether

an applicant is currently working?” and were

given four options (as seen in Figure 12).

Figure 12 Applicants' Current Employment Situation

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Strongly considered

Somewhat considered

Slightly considered

Not considered

at all

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5 YearsNext Year

Very

Somewhat

Slightly

Not at all


Figure 3

10.6%22.5%

16.2%

29.3%

41.4%25.7%

31.8%

22.6%

Figure 1.2

56.4%

32.3%

11.3%

Figure 2

18.6%

24.6%

13.4%

43.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NoMaybeYes

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

65.5%

23.8%

10.8%

NoMaybeYes

Over 43% of Kearney area businesses responded that an applicant’s current

employment status is either slightly considered or not considered at all. On the other

hand, nearly 57% of businesses responded that employment status is somewhat or

strongly considered when assessing an applicant.

Figure 13 Employer Hesitation Regarding Non-Employed Applicants

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

N/A: not considered

1 year or more

6 months - 1 year

Tim

e Sp

ent N

ot E

mpl

oyed

3-6 months

1-3 months

Less than 1 month


3.6%

15.8%

18.4%

24.8%

13.5%

23.9%

Figure 13 displays the results of the question, “What length of time not employed would

cause hesitation about a candidate or affect a hiring or interview decision in a negative

way?” In the Kearney area, the greatest percentage of employers responded that six

months to a year of an applicants’ time not employed would cause hesitation (24.8%).


Results

Figure 14 Amount of Applicants with Experience in Related Industry or Occupation

Figure 7-9 p. 10

21.7%24.7%

6.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

OccupationIndustry

All or nearly all applicants

Most applicants

Some applicants

Few or no applicants

19.5%

46.7%

26.4%

7.4%

47.6%

Figure 7-9 p. 10

21.7%24.7%

6.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

OccupationIndustry

All or nearly all applicants

Most applicants

Some applicants

Few or no applicants

19.5%

46.7%

26.4%

7.4%

47.6%

Respondents were asked the question, “Generally speaking, when hiring, how many

applicants have experience in the same industry or a closely-related industry?”

Respondents were also asked the same question about applicants’ experience in the

same occupation or a closely-related occupation (see Figure 14). Respondents were

given four options to describe applicants, and 69.3% of Kearney area businesses

indicated that some, a few, or no applicants had experience in the same industry or a

closely-related industry. On the other hand, 30.7% of respondents indicated that most,

nearly all, or all applicants had experience in a similar industry.

Figure 15 Competency of Typical Applicant Pool

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Ability to pay attention to detail

Critical thinking skills

Advanced computer skills

Work ethic

Leadership skills

Ability to adapt to change


Work ethic


Leadership skills

Creativity




Leadership skills

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

N/AStrongAdequateLess than adequate

Willingness to learnAbility to work as a team

Verbal communicationAttitude

Basic math skillsCustomer service skills

Basic computer skillsAbility to adapt to change

Ability to work independentlyWritten communication

CreativitySales skills

Ability to problem solveAbility to pay attention to detail

Critical thinking skillsWork ethic

Leadership skillsAdvanced computer skills

Figures 10-11 p. 11

40.9%

39.6%

32.6%

32.1%

31.1%

28.1%

27.5%

24.5%

23.4%

22.1%

21.7%

21.3%

19.4%

14.9%

14.2%

13.5%

11.3%

31.5%

43.2%

39.6%

43.7%

38.6%

52.3%

54.1%

48.7%

49.4%

51.8%

47.3%

64.6%

48.7%

58.7%

53.8%

52.5%

5.2%

0.9%

27.2%

13.6% 13.3%

28.0%

16.7%

36.5%

26.8%

33.6%

39.5%

2.9%

0.3%

5.0%

1.0%

2.8%

8.2%

8.8%

3.9%

0.5%

1.3%

0.3%

25.3%

12.6%

15.0%

13.8%

26.9%

28.3%

19.7%

35.7%

41.2% 16.3%

29.5% 27.6%

21.3%

2.0%

2.4%

1.7%

7.7%

50.0%

43.2%

41.1%

35.1%

52.3%

38.6%

31.9%

49.1%

39.5%

28.3%

34.8%

42.1%

26.1%

40.9%

31.9%

Acc

omm

odat

ion

& Fo

od S

ervi

ces

Hea

lth C

are

& So

cial

Ass

ista

nce

Reta

il Tr

ade

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%




Work ethic

Leadership skills



Work ethic


Leadership skills

Creativity




Leadership skills

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%











Figures 10-11 p. 11

40.9%

39.6%

32.6%

32.1%

31.1%

28.1%

27.5%

24.5%

23.4%

22.1%

21.7%

21.3%

19.4%

14.9%

14.2%

13.5%

11.3%

31.5%

43.2%

39.6%

43.7%

38.6%

52.3%

54.1%

48.7%

49.4%

51.8%

47.3%

64.6%

48.7%

58.7%

53.8%

52.5%

5.2%

0.9%

27.2%

13.6% 13.3%

28.0%

16.7%

36.5%

26.8%

33.6%

39.5%

2.9%

0.3%

5.0%

1.0%

2.8%

8.2%

8.8%

3.9%

0.5%

1.3%

0.3%

25.3%

12.6%

15.0%

13.8%

26.9%

28.3%

19.7%

35.7%

41.2% 16.3%

29.5% 27.6%

21.3%

2.0%

2.4%

1.7%

7.7%

50.0%

43.2%

41.1%

35.1%

52.3%

38.6%

31.9%

49.1%

39.5%

28.3%

34.8%

42.1%

26.1%

40.9%

31.9%

Acc

omm

odat

ion

& Fo

od S

ervi

ces

Hea

lth C

are

& So

cial

Ass

ista

nce

Reta

il Tr

ade

Considering occupation experience, over

66% of employers responded that some,

a few, or no applicants had experience in

a similar occupation. Conversely, 33.8% of

respondents indicated that most, nearly all,

or all applicants had experience in the same

or a similar occupation as the one for which

they applied.

Comparing results shown in Figure 14,

similar results were observed for industry

and occupational experience. However, a

greater percentage of respondents said that

all applicants had experience in a similar

occupational (7.4%) compared to industry

(6%). Furthermore, a greater percentage of

respondents stated most applicants had

occupational experience (26.4%) compared

to industry experience (24.7%).

Competency

Businesses were asked, “When hiring,

please rate the overall competency level

for the following work skills for your typical

applicant pool.” As seen in Figure 15,

respondents were given a list of skills and

four options to choose from to describe

the competency level of their applicant

pool. Each of the skills listed are not always

applicable to every occupation or industry

so the option of ‘N/A’ was provided to

respondents. The results in Figure 15 are

sorted by those skills with the greatest

percentage of employers responding “less

than adequate.”

Over 40% of employers gave applicants a

“less than adequate” rating for advanced

computer skills (which includes computer

programming skills), but 27.6% of

respondents said this skill is not applicable

to their applicant pool. Leadership (39.6%)

and work ethic (32.6%) were also skills

more often rated as less than adequate


Results

in the Kearney area applicant pool. On the

other hand, 39.5% of respondents rated

applicants’ willingness to learn as “strong.”

Furthermore, nearly all employers reported

that applicants’ ability to work as a team

(87.4%) and verbal communication (85.6%)

were “adequate” or “strong.”

As seen in Figure 16, the previous question

was analyzed for the top three responding

industries in the Kearney area. The top

five skills most often reported as less than

adequate for each industry are displayed.

For example, in the accommodation and

food services industry, leadership skills

were most often reported as “less than

adequate” (52.3%), followed by critical

thinking skills (50%) and advanced

computer skills (43.2%). Applicants’

advanced computer skills were reported to

be one of the highest “less than adequate”

skills for each industry. However, advanced

computer skills were often rated as “not

applicable” in the accommodation (31.8%),

health care (25.5%), and retail trade (25%)

industries.

Hiring Difficulty

Businesses named three occupations they

have tried to hire or have recently hired then

indicated whether or not it was difficult to

find workers for the listed occupations.

Just over 79% of Kearney area businesses

reported it was difficult to find workers for

the occupations they have been trying to

hire or recently hired.

Figure 16 Less Than Adequate Competency of Typical Applicant Pool for Selected Industries

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%




Work ethic

Leadership skills



Work ethic


Leadership skills

Creativity




Leadership skills

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%











Figures 10-11 p. 11

40.9%

39.6%

32.6%

32.1%

31.1%

28.1%

27.5%

24.5%

23.4%

22.1%

21.7%

21.3%

19.4%

14.9%

14.2%

13.5%

11.3%

31.5%

43.2%

39.6%

43.7%

38.6%

52.3%

54.1%

48.7%

49.4%

51.8%

47.3%

64.6%

48.7%

58.7%

53.8%

52.5%

5.2%

0.9%

27.2%

13.6% 13.3%

28.0%

16.7%

36.5%

26.8%

33.6%

39.5%

2.9%

0.3%

5.0%

1.0%

2.8%

8.2%

8.8%

3.9%

0.5%

1.3%

0.3%

25.3%

12.6%

15.0%

13.8%

26.9%

28.3%

19.7%

35.7%

41.2% 16.3%

29.5% 27.6%

21.3%

2.0%

2.4%

1.7%

7.7%

50.0%

43.2%

41.1%

35.1%

52.3%

38.6%

31.9%

49.1%

39.5%

28.3%

34.8%

42.1%

26.1%

40.9%

31.9%

Acc

omm

odat

ion

& Fo

od S

ervi

ces

Hea

lth C

are

& So

cial

Ass

ista

nce

Reta

il Tr

ade

Figure 17.1 displays the percent of employers, in the top three responding industries,

who reported it was difficult to find workers. Businesses operating in the retail trade

industry most often reported they had difficulty finding workers (80%). Slightly more

employers in the wholesale trade industry reported having difficulty finding workers

(79.4%) than Kearney area businesses overall (79.2%).

Figure 17.1 Difficulty Finding Workers by Industry

79.2%

85.0%

81.3%

79.5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All Industries

Accommodation and Food Services

Retail Trade

Health Care and Social Assistance


Results

Figure 17.2 Difficulty Finding Workers by Occupation

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Overqualified

Citizenship/work authorization

Language barrier

Lack required education

Lack required licenses/certificates

Other

Failed background check/drug screen

Availability for shifts required

Wage demands too high

Lack occupation specific skills

Lack of work experience

Poor work history

Not enough applicants

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

79.2%

87.4%

80.0%

69.1%Office and Administrative Support

Transportation and Material Moving

Food Preparation and Serving Related

All Occupations

79.4%

47.8%

44.0%

35.4%

32.9%

30.3%

20.6%

16.9%

11.9%

10.7%

6.2%

3.9%

3.7%

Figures 13 - 14 p. 13

Kearney area businesses most often reported recently hiring or trying to hire for these

occupation groups: food preparation and serving related, transportation and material

moving, and office and administrative support (see Figure 17.2). These occupation

groups encompass many specific occupations, including: bartenders, industrial truck

and tractor operators, and bank tellers. Businesses that hire workers for transportation

and material moving (80%) and food preparation and serving-related occupations

(87.4%) more often reported having difficulty finding workers than Kearney area

businesses overall (79.2%).

Figure 18 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Overqualified

Citizenship/work authorization

Language barrier

Lack required education

Lack required licenses/certificates

Other

Failed background check/drug screen

Availability for shifts required

Wage demands too high

Lack occupation specific skills

Lack of work experience

Poor work history

Not enough applicants

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

79.2%

87.4%

80.0%

69.1%Office and Administrative Support


Food Preparation and Serving Related

All Occupations

79.4%

47.8%

44.0%

35.4%

32.9%

30.3%

20.6%

16.9%

11.9%

10.7%

6.2%

3.9%

3.7%

Figures 13 - 14 p. 13

Businesses were also asked why they

faced challenges finding workers for the

specific occupations they have recently

hired or have tried to hire. Businesses were

allowed to select from a list of options

and choose any reasons that applied.

This follow-up question was only asked

when firms indicated that workers in an

occupation were difficult to find. Figure 18

displays the percentage of respondents, for

all occupations, who reported a reason for

difficulty in finding workers.

Nearly 80% of Kearney area businesses

that reported having difficulty finding

workers for a specific job said that not

receiving enough applicants was a reason

why the search was challenging. Nearly

48% of businesses said workers’ poor work

history was a reason they had difficulty

hiring for that occupation, followed by a

lack of work experience (44%). On the other

hand, very few businesses reported that

the difficulty in finding workers was due

to a language barrier (6.2%) or the worker

having a citizenship or work authorization

issue (3.9%), and only 3.7% of businesses

reported that a worker being overqualified

as being a challenge.

Respondents were given the opportunity to

specify other reasons for hiring difficulties

not listed. In the Kearney area, other

reasons included issues with workers’ work

ethic, attendance, and communication

skills. Additional reasons for hiring difficulty

included issues that weren’t related to

problems with applicants, such as non-

traditional work hours, difficulty of the work,

and the lack of consistent full-time hours

available.


Table 5 displays the percent of businesses,

in selected industry groups, who gave

reasons why they had difficulty finding

workers. The top three responding industry

groups were manufacturing, wholesale

trade, and retail trade. These industry

groups contain many specific industries

which can be viewed on the Bureau of

Labor Statistics North American Industry

Classification System website located here:

https://www.bls.gov/bls/naics.htm.

Firms in all three of the industry groups

most often reported that not receiving

enough applicants was why they had

difficulty hiring for a position. Furthermore,

all three industries often reported that a

lack of work experience or a poor work

history were reasons for having difficulty

hiring workers. Lacking the required

education was more often reported as a

hiring challenge by wholesale trade (15.5%)

compared to manufacturing and retail trade

(7.6%) firms.

Table 5 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers - Top Responding Industries

Reason for Difficulty Manufacturing Wholesale Trade Retail Trade

Not enough applicants 79.6% 82.2% 75.0%

Poor work history 44.8% 41.3% 55.4%

Lack of work experience 42.9% 44.8% 44.4%

Wage demands too high 37.1% 30.6% 27.5%

Availability for shifts required 32.8% 29.6% 28.8%

Lack occupation specific skills 31.2% 35.7% 30.5%

Failed background check/drug screen 22.4% 22.2% 21.4%

Other 11.5% 19.6% 18.0%

Lack required licenses/certificates 8.4% 15.3% 10.8%

Lack required education 7.6% 15.5% 7.6%

Overqualified 3.9% 3.7% 3.8%

Citizenship/work authorization 2.7% 6.4% 5.1%

Language barrier 1.7% 7.5% 8.5%

Respondents were given the option to specify if any other issues were the reasons why

they had difficulty finding workers for a specific position. In the manufacturing industry,

other reasons included issues with work ethic, and willingness to relocate for work.

Other reasons for hiring difficulty given by businesses in the wholesale trade industry

included the effort required for the job and non-traditional work hours. Retail trade firms

also reported other reasons for hiring difficulties, including issues with work ethic and

attendance.

Table 6 displays the reasons businesses had difficulty hiring workers for the three

occupation groups that firms most often hired or tried to hire. The top three occupation

groups were food preparation and serving-related, office and administrative support, and

transportation and material moving. These occupation groups comprise many specific

occupations including; fast food and counter workers, bill and account collectors,

railroad conductors and yardmasters, respectively. The reasons in Table 6 are sorted by

the largest to smallest percent in food preparation and serving related occupations.

Businesses that hire workers for the top three occupation groups most often reported

that not receiving enough applicants was a reason why they had difficulty finding

workers. Furthermore, firms hiring workers in all three occupation groups often reported

that having a poor work history was why it was difficult to find workers for that position.

Being available for required shifts was cited as being a hiring challenge more frequently

for food preparation and serving related occupations (52.7%) compared to office and

administrative support (38.4%) and transportation and material moving occupations

(18.3%).


Table 6 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers - Most Often Hired Occupations

Reason for Difficulty Food Preparation and Serving Related

Office and Administrative Support


Not enough applicants 81.9% 70.0% 75.8%

Poor work history 58.6% 52.4% 51.0%

Availability for shifts required 52.7% 38.4% 18.3%

Lack of work experience 34.6% 44.8% 48.4%

Wage demands too high 29.1% 34.1% 34.0%

Lack occupation specific skills 19.5% 36.7% 36.8%

Failed background check/drug screen 15.8% 19.2% 37.8%

Other 6.2% 20.7% 23.7%

Overqualified 3.1% 7.4% 1.9%

Language barrier 1.2% 11.5% 12.0%

Lack required education 1.2% 7.7% 4.2%

Lack required licenses/certificates 0.0% 3.4% 27.2%

Citizenship/work authorization 0.0% 5.9% 3.3%

Respondents were given the option to specify if any other issues were the reasons

why they had difficulty finding workers for a specific position. Firms hiring workers

for food preparation and serving related occupations indicated issues with work

ethic and motivation, while businesses hiring for office and administrative support

occupations indicated issues with work ethic and communication skills. Firms hiring for

transportation and material moving occupations also reported other reasons for hiring

difficulties, including issues with worker responsibility and the long hours required.

Profile of Selected Occupations

Table 7 on the following pages displays information for two specific H3 (high wage, high

demand, and high skill) occupations that employers have most often recently hired or

tried to hire. In the Kearney area, the top H3 occupations were heavy and tractor-trailer

truck drivers and registered nurses. Workers for cashier occupations were also highly

sought after in the Kearney area. These occupations represent a variety of education

and work experience requirements and training needs. Information displayed also

includes reported wages and the reasons employers have difficulty hiring for these

specific occupations. Businesses were able to select all answers that applied for

questions regarding the reasons for hiring difficulty, location of training, and type of

training provided.

Businesses responded to the question, “What is the average starting wage or salary you

are willing to pay?” Hourly wage and yearly salary responses were analyzed separately.

Survey respondents did not always provide both an hourly and annual figure, and it is

possible that the nature of jobs is different for hourly versus salaried positions.

In addition, wage responses were not

standardized nor were respondents

prompted with options, and other pay

methods were not included (e.g. pay per

mile).

The average starting annual salary that

employers were willing to pay heavy and

tractor-trailer truck drivers was $41,020 per

year and hourly employees earned $13.81

per hour on average. Over 61% of employers

had no minimum education requirement

for truck driver occupations. Additional

requirements for truck driving occupations

often include obtaining a commercial

driver’s license and hazmat training. Over

82% of employers who have recently hired

or tried to hire workers for this occupation

had difficulty when finding workers. The

top reasons for hiring challenges reported

by employers were not receiving enough

applicants (63.8%) and lack of work

experience (51.5%).


Results

Table 7 Profile of Selected Occupations

Starting Wages Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers Cashiers Registered Nurses

Average hourly wage* $13.81 $9.61 $21.42 Average yearly wage* $41,020 Suppressed** Suppressed**

Education Requirements Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers Cashiers Registered Nurses

No minimum education required 61.5% 56.5% 0.0%High school diploma/GED 34.7% 43.5% 0.0%Technical/vocational degree 3.8% 0.0% 0.0%Associate degree 0.0% 0.0% 68.8%Bachelor’s degree 0.0% 0.0% 31.3%Master’s degree or higher 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Additional requirements (% Yes)

Special training 76.8% 26.2% 81.3%License 82.3% 4.3% 100.0%Certificate 35.9% 17.5% 25.0%

Work Experience Requirements Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers Cashiers Registered Nurses

No experience required 11.3% 82.7% 24.9%< 6 mon. related 19.0% 17.3% 0.0%6 mon. - 1 year 21.5% 0.0% 0.0%1-2 years 35.3% 0.0% 49.8%3-5 years 13.0% 0.0% 25.2%5+ years 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Difficult to find workers Heavy and Tractor- Trailer Truck Drivers Cashiers Registered Nurses

Yes 82.1% 74.0% 81.3%

Reason for difficultyNot enough applicants 63.8% 52.3% 55.6%Lack of work experience 51.5% 8.7% 5.6%Poor work history 48.3% 47.7% 0.0%Failed background check/drug screen 37.8% 26.0% 0.0%Lack occupation specific skills 34.6% 8.7% 5.6%Lack required license/certificates 32.2% 0.0% 16.7%Wage demands too high 24.7% 34.7% 44.4%Other 19.5% 8.7% 11.1%Language barrier 14.3% 0.0% 0.0%Availability for shifts required 12.6% 52.0% 33.3%Lack required education 7.0% 8.7% 5.6%

Citizenship/work authorization 3.1% 0.0% 0.0%Overqualified 0.0% 4.3% 0.0%


Results

Training Needs Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers Cashiers Registered Nurses

Where training is providedIn-House 79.6% 91.3% 88.5%Out-of-House 47.8% 4.3% 14.2%

Type of training providedClass but no certification 23.7% 4.3% 5.6%License 18.3% 0.0% 16.7%Certification course 23.4% 13.0% 16.7%College/community college course 3.3% 0.0% 0.0%Training proivded by other workers or supervisor 69.5% 74.0% 66.7%N/A: No additional training provided 5.5% 17.3% 5.6%Other 18.9% 4.3% 11.1%

*Hourly and yearly wages are calculated separately, wages are the average starting pay employers are willing to pay.

**Suppressed for confidentiality.

Cashiers earned $9.61 per hour, on average, in the Kearney area. Over 56% of employers

have no education requirement for workers in cashier occupations. Most employers

report that no prior work experience is required to work as a cashier. Nearly 75% of

employers who have recently hired or tried to hire workers for this occupation had

difficulty when finding workers. The top reasons for hiring challenges reported by

employers were not receiving enough applicants and workers’ availability for required

shifts.

Registered nurses in the Kearney area earned an average of $21.42 per hour. Nearly 69%

of businesses that hire workers in this occupation require applicants to hold at least an

associate’s degree. All employers report that a license is required to work as a registered

nurse. Nearly half of employers also require applicants have at least one to two years

of work experience. More than 81% of employers who have recently hired or tried to

hire workers for this occupation had difficulty when finding workers. Over 55% of the

employers that reported a hiring difficulty said not receiving enough applicants was a

reason for that challenge.

Employers hiring for these occupations often provide workers in-house training from

colleagues or a supervisor. Nearly all of the employers hiring for cashiers (91.3%)

provided their training in-house. Over 23% of employers who hired truck drivers provided

a class, but no certification and 23.4% of employers provide a certification course.

The Occupational Employment Statistics

(OES) program uses different methodology

than the current report, but can provide

additional insight into pay rates for specific

industries and occupations. The OES

program collects wage data for the entire

state of Nebraska in addition to wage data

regarding more than one metropolitan

statistical area, multiple regions, and metro

and non-metro areas. Based on the May

2015 Occupational Employment Survey, the

hourly entry wage for heavy and tractor-

trailer truck drivers in the central region

was $15.04 and the entry-level yearly salary

was $31,274. According to OES, cashiers

earned an hourly entry wage of $8.92 and a

yearly salary $18,540. For registered nurses

the entry-level hourly wage was $21.34 and

their salary was estimated to be $44,400

per year.


ConclusionThis report utilized the results of the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs to evaluate employers’ assessment of their

workforce and applicant pool, characteristics of hiring and training practices, and hiring challenges faced by businesses in the area. The

majority of responding businesses reported difficulty finding workers for the occupations they were hiring. The most common reason

businesses gave for difficulty hiring was not having enough applicants.

Table 8.1 Key Results - Business CharacteristicsBusiness CharacteristicsOpenings

Hired or Tried to Hire Last Two Years 94.5%At Least 1 Job Opening 53.9%Average Current Job Openings 2.6

If Asked to Consider ExpansionLabor Availability Issues Either Would Be or Might Be Present 89.9%

Expansion Ability Limited 56.3%Percent of Occupations in Which Businesses Have Difficulty Finding Workers 79.2%

The vast majority of businesses that responded to the survey (94.5%) indicated they

hired or tried to hire at least one worker in the last two years. Furthermore, nearly 54%

of responding businesses had at least one current job opening at their location, and

those businesses had an average of 2.6 current job openings. Many businesses were

hiring at their locations, but the survey also inquired about business expansion, which

would require substantially more hiring.

Regardless of industry or occupation, if asked to consider a major expansion, over 89%

of businesses reported that labor availability issues either would be present or might be

present. A follow-up question posed to these businesses was, “Would issues with labor

availability limit your ability to undertake a major expansion at this location?” Results

indicated that labor availability issues would limit 56.4% of businesses, might limit

32.3% of businesses, and would not limit 11.3% of businesses should they undertake a

major expansion.

Respondents listed occupations that they had been trying to hire or recently hired and

whether it was difficult to find workers for those occupations. Over 79% of Kearney

area businesses reported it was difficult to find workers. As seen in Figure 17.2, 87.4%

of employers who were hiring for food preparation and serving related occupations

indicated it was difficult to find workers.

As displayed in”Figure 18 Reasons for Difficulty Finding Workers” the reasons that

business gave for having difficulty finding workers were most often related to not

receiving enough applicants, applicants’ poor work history, and applicants’ lack of work

experience or occupation-specific skills. This survey did not inquire about the recruiting

or job posting practices of businesses, but employers did answer questions about

required education, work experience, and skill level qualifications.

The vast majority of Kearney area

businesses reported that either they had

no minimum education requirement for

applicants or they required a high school

diploma or equivalent (83.6%). Some

responding employers indicated they do

require a technical or vocational degree

(5.7%), or an associate (4.6%) or bachelor’s

degree (4.8%), but few businesses said they

required an applicant to hold a master’s

degree or higher (1.3%).

Similarly, the majority of businesses

responding to the survey had no prior

work experience requirement (57.3%).

However, nearly 25% of employers did

require no more than a year of related

work experience, and 17.9% of businesses

required a year or more experience to be

qualified for the position they recently hired

or tried to hire.

Table 8.2 Key Results - Applicant CharacteristicsApplicant Experience Percent

Some to No Applicants with Experience in a Similar Industry

69.3%

Some to No Applicants with Experience in a Similar Occupation

66.2%

Businesses that Don’t Require Prior Work Experience

57.3%


Table 8.3 Key Results - Characteristics of Current WorkersCharacteristics of Current Workers PercentPercent of Businesses That Rated Skills as Deficient

Leadership 50.7%Work Ethic 47.1%Critical Thinking 43.1%

A majority of businesses reported

that some or few to no applicants had

experience in either a similar industry

(69.3%) or occupation (66.2%).

Businesses were prompted to rate the

required skill level as either beginning,

intermediate, advanced or not typically

required. The skills that businesses most

often rated as not typically required were

advanced computer skills (45%), sales

(34.4%), and basic computer skills (19.4%).

A majority of businesses reported that for

11 of the 18 skills listed, most workers

were required to have an intermediate skill

level. Businesses most often reported that

an advanced level of skill was required for

work ethic (37.3%), ability to work as a team

(32.5%), and ability to pay attention to detail

(31.6%).

Results were positive when businesses

responded to questions about the

competency of the applicant pool. No

more than a third of all businesses rated

any single skills as less than adequate.

Furthermore, advanced computer skills was

the skill most often reported as less than

adequate, but was also the skill most often

reported as not applicable (See “Figure 15

Competency of Typical Applicant Pool”).

Regarding perceptions of the current workforce, no more than 51% of businesses

reported a deficiency in any listed skill. Furthermore, some of those skills most often

rated as deficient were skills not easily taught (e.g., work ethic and attitude) or skills that

may have a misperceived deficiency (e.g., leadership and critical thinking). There may

be a lack of opportunity for workers to grow into leadership roles or make decisions

based on critical thinking, which may lead to a perception of deficiency. Regardless, the

majority of businesses reported no major issues with the competency of the applicant

pool or with skill deficiencies in their workforce.

Several general recommendations for Kearney area businesses emerged based on

the results of the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs. Employers

expressed that they are not finding enough applicants, or the applicants lack the

required amount of education or work experience. In some cases, businesses may

consider relaxing skill and education requirements and increasing the amount of training

provided to inexperienced workers. In order to broaden and improve the candidate pool,

businesses may need to explore a variety of strategies.

In addition to the Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Report, a report based on data

received from individuals in central Nebraska is also available. The Kearney Labor

Availability Report details information about local potential job seekers and active job

seekers. Also, the Kearney Skills Gap report provides additional recommendations for

local communities to improve the area workforce. These and other reports can be found

in the Labor Availability Study publication page here: dol.nebraska.gov/las.



Number of Responses by Zip CodeZIP Codes Number of Responses68803 <568826 <5

68836 768840 6

68845 (Kearney) 55

68847 (Kearney) 10368849 <568850 4168863 <568866 <5

68869 668870 <568876 <568878 <568901 <568924 <568927 <568937 <568939 668947 <568949 4168958 <5

68959 1469130 1469138 17Total 335


MethodologyThe Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs was commissioned by the

Nebraska Legislature. Data collection, survey processing, and assignment of data

weights were conducted by NDOL. NDOL analyzed results and produced the final report.

Comparable reports are available for the communities of Lincoln, Omaha, the combined

Lincoln and Omaha "metro" area, Scottsbluff, Grand Island, Hastings, and Kearney.

Website: dol.nebraska.gov/las.

The goals of the Central Nebraska Survey of Hiring and Training Needs was to gather

information about the characteristics of local businesses, labor issues in the area,

and local workforce needs. Specifically, information was gathered from employers

about the types of occupations they are searching for and hiring, the types of degrees,

certifications, and skills that occupations require, and the types of training they provide.

Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire was adapted from previous survey projects conducted in

other areas of Nebraska. The questionnaire was created and modified by NDOL, NDED,

and BOSR. BOSR provided assistance with question development, formatting, and

layout. Improvements were made to the questionnaire based on results of studies in

other areas.

Survey Area and Sample

Commuting patterns were reviewed for the central Nebraska area. The ZIP codes with

the highest number of commuters traveling to Grand Island, Hastings, and Kearney

for work were identified. Additional ZIP codes were added after the city areas were

defined to combine them into one large survey area that reflects the region from which

businesses draw the majority of their workforce. All private businesses in the survey

area with at least 10 employees were included in the sample. Business areas were then

split into three distinct regions which focused on businesses in and around the cities of

Grand Island, Hastings, and Kearney.

Data Collection & Response Rates

NDOL mailed the surveys and collected responses. Included directions indicated

that the questionnaire be completed by an owner, senior manager, human resource

personnel, or fist-line supervisor who is knowledgeable about the hiring and training

needs of this company. In order to fully understand the characteristics of area

businesses, employers were asked to complete the questionnaire regardless of whether

the company has not hired or is not planning to hire any new workers in the near future.

Data collection began on September 6th, 2016 with the mailing of initial survey packets

to all selected businesses. Each survey packet contained a cover letter, questionnaire

and postage-paid return envelope. A postcard reminder and two additional mailings

were sent to non-respondents.

A total of 817 complete responses were

received (333 in the Grand Island area/149

in the Hastings area/335 in the Kearney

area). The total sample included 1,777

businesses, and 15 incomplete responses

were removed from the final dataset. The

response rate was 45.9%.

Data Processing & Cleaning

Data entry was completed by NDOL staff

using the Labor Availability Study page at

dol.nebraska.gov/las. The data cleaning

process was developed by NDOL staff

to create consistency within data sets

prior to analysis. Initial data cleaning was

conducted by NDOL to review responses

and verify that the skip patterns on the

questionnaire were followed. For instance,

the ninth question asked about the

respondent’s thoughts on major expansion.

Based on their response, instructions

then directed them to a specific follow-up

question. When the wrong question was

answered, the response was moved to the

appropriate section and non-applicable

items were removed. Weights were

assigned to responses by the NDOL to

make the responses as representative of

the survey areas as possible.

Additionally, several open-ended survey

questions were consistently coded prior

to starting the data analysis. Staff from

the Occupational Employment Statistics

unit in the NDOL assigned Standard

Occupational Classification codes to

occupations reported. NDOL staff assigned

Classification of Instructional Programs

codes to responses regarding educational

attainment. All other open-ended questions

were reviewed as well to create consistent

codes to use in the survey analysis.



Credits

John H. Albin Commissioner

Nebraska Department of Labor

Phillip Baker Labor Market Information Administrator


Scott Hunzeker Research Supervisor


Dillon Cornett Research Analyst


Courtney Dentlinger Director Nebraska Department of Economic Development

David Dearmont, PhD Research Administrator Nebraska Department of Economic Development

Melissa Trueblood Research Manager Nebraska Department of Economic Development

Grace Johnson Public Information Officer Nebraska Department of Labor

Brittney Lippincott Graphic Designer Nebraska Department of Labor

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Documents

Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Reportneworks.nebraska.gov/admin/gsipub/htmlarea/...Central Nebraska Kearney Hiring and Training Needs Report PUBLISHED SPRING 2017 5 Introduction