Job market is 'trash' right now, career coach says — here's why
The U.S. job market isn't looking too hot for recent college graduates and other job seekers, according to economists and labor experts.
"The job market is kind of trash right now," said Mandi Woodruff-Santos, a career coach and personal finance expert.
"I mean, it's really difficult," she added. "It's really difficult for people who have many years of experience, so it's going to be difficult for college kids."
That may seem counterintuitive.
The national unemployment rate in May was relatively low, at 4.2%. The layoff rate has also been historically low, suggesting employers are holding on to their workers.
Yet, hiring has been anemic. The pace of employer hiring in April was the lowest in more than 10 years, since August 2014, excluding the early months of the Covid pandemic.
More from Personal Finance:Millions would lose health insurance under GOP megabillAverage 401(k) balances drop 3% due to market volatilityTrump administration asks Supreme Court to lift ban on Education Department layoffs
The rate at which workers are quitting — a barometer of worker confidence about their job prospects — has also plummeted to below pre-pandemic levels, a stark reversal from the "great resignation" in 2021 and 2022.
"It will be a tough summer for anyone looking for full-time work," Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, wrote in an e-mail Friday.
"This is an 'abundance of caution economy' where businesses are only filling critical positions and job seekers, especially recent graduates, are struggling to find employment," she said.
While the job market may be limping along by some measures, Long also said a recession doesn't seem "imminent."
Businesses added more jobs than expected in May, for example. But those gains have slowed significantly — a worrisome sign, economists said.
Employers appear reluctant to hire in an uncertain economy.
CEO confidence plummeted in the second quarter of 2025, seeing its largest quarterly decline on record dating to 1976, according to a survey by The Conference Board. Uncertainty around geopolitical instability, trade and tariff policy were the largest business risks, according to Roger Ferguson Jr., the group's chair emeritus.
The share of CEOs expecting to expand their workforce fell slightly, to 28% in Q2 from 32% in Q1, and the share planning to cut their workforce rose 1 point, to 28%.
"The steady erosion in the US job market cannot continue forever — at some point, there will just not be much left to give," Cory Stahle, an economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab, wrote in an analysis Friday.
"In a low-hiring, slow-growth environment, employers can only hold onto their existing employees for so long before they too will have to be let go — increasing unemployment even as job opportunities continue to shrink," Stahle wrote.
Don't underestimate the "power of personal connections" to help get noticed in a competitive job market like this one, said Woodruff-Santos, the career coach.
Her No. 1 piece of advice: Make yourself "uncomfortable" in order to network and build professional relationships.
"You need to put yourself in situations where you may not know everybody, you may not know one person, where you may actually need someone to give you a bit of a helping hand, and to feel confident and OK doing that," Woodruff-Santos said.
If you're pushed to accept a job you don't love to make ends meet, make a plan to keep current in the field to which you aspire, she said.
In other words, build the skills that will eventually help you get that job, perhaps by taking a training course, getting a certificate or doing contract work, she said. Also, consider joining a professional organization, putting yourself in the same room as people in your desired field and with whom you can connect, she said.
These steps raise your chances of getting attention from future employers and keeping your skills sharp, Woodruff-Santos said.
She also had some words of encouragement.
"The job market has been trash before," she said. "It'll be trash again. This probably won't be your first trash job market. And you're going to be OK."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
Supreme Court rejects toy company's push for a quick decision on Trump's tariffs
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a push from an Illinois toy company asking for a quick decision on the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs. Learning Resources Inc. wanted the justices to take up the case soon, rather than let it continue to play out in lower courts. The company argues the tariffs and uncertainty are having a 'massive impact' on businesses around the country and the issue needs swift attention from the nation's highest court. The justices didn't explain their reasoning in the brief order rebuffing the motion to fast-track the issue, but the Supreme Court is typically reluctant to take up cases before lower courts have decided. An appeals court is set to hear the case in late July. The company argues that the Republican president illegally imposed tariffs under an emergency powers law, bypassing Congress. It won an early victory in a lower court, but the order is on hold as an appeals court considers a similar ruling putting a broader block on Trump's tariffs. The appeals court has allowed Trump to continue collecting tariffs under the emergency powers law for now. The Trump administration has defended the tariffs by arguing that the emergency powers law gives the president the authority to regulate imports during national emergencies and that the country's longtime trade deficit qualifies as a national emergency.
San Francisco Chronicle
9 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Supreme Court delivers another blow to California's imperiled emissions standards
The Supreme Court reinstated legal challenges by oil and gas companies Friday to California's strict emissions standards for motor vehicles, standards that the Trump administration is likely to halt on its own in the near future. Federal law allows California to set tighter limits on auto emissions than the national standard, and since 1990 has allowed other states to adopt California's rules, an option taken by 17 states and the District of Columbia. But fuel companies affected by the increasing use of electric vehicles contend the state's standards are too restrictive and have sued to overturn them. Lower federal courts ruled that companies had failed to show they were being harmed by the standards, and therefore lacked legal standing to sue, because electric car sales are increasing for other reasons. The Supreme Court disagreed in a 7-2 decision. 'The whole point of the regulations is to increase the number of electric vehicles in the new automobile market beyond what consumers would otherwise demand,' Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion. 'The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court.' But dissenting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said lawyers in the case had told the court that the Environmental Protection Agency, under President Donald Trump, was about to withdraw its approval of California's waiver from nationwide standards, 'which will put an end to California's emissions program.' The EPA took that action during Trump's first administration, which was reversed under President Joe Biden. Meanwhile, legislation passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Trump would prevent California from banning sales of new gasoline-powered vehicles in 2035, a law the state has challenged in court. The Supreme Court 'is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests,' and Friday's ruling 'will no doubt aid future attempts by the fuel industry to attack the Clean Air Act,' said Jackson, a Biden appointee. In a separate dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court should have returned the case to a lower court to await the EPA's action. Kavanaugh, however, said fuel companies affected by California's current standards could seek to prove in court that they were arbitrary and unlawful. His opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan. Liane Randolph, chair of the California Air Resources Board, said it was not a full-scale rejection of the state's emissions standards. 'This ruling does not change California's Advanced Clean Cars rulemaking, nor does it dispute what data has shown to be true: vehicle emissions are a huge source of pollution with grave health impacts, consumer adoption of zero emission vehicles continues to rise, and global auto manufacturers are committed to an electric future,' she said in a statement. But attorney Brett Skorup of the libertarian Cato Institute said the ruling was 'a welcome rebuke to judicial gatekeeping' and affirmed that 'predictable economic harms from government regulation' entitle 'injured parties (to) have their day in court.' The case is Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA, No. 24-7.
CNBC
9 hours ago
- CNBC
Supreme Court rejects fast track of Trump tariff challenge by toy companies
Key Points President Donald Trump's tariffs, a key part of his trade agenda, have drawn legal challenges from businesses and individuals questioning his authority to implement the high levies. The Supreme Court ruling gives the Trump administration more time to file its response to the challenge from two toy companies. The two toy companies argued that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not give Trump the authority to implement his tariffs. The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request from two toy companies to expedite their challenge to President Donald Trump's tariffs. The ruling from the nation's high court means that the Trump administration now has the standard 30-day window to file its response to the challenge. Two small family-owned companies, Learning Resources and hand2mind, argued that Trump lacked authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose his April 2 tariffs. The companies earlier this week asked the Supreme Court to expedite consideration of their challenge and bypass a federal appeals court. "In light of the tariffs' massive impact on virtually every business and consumer across the nation, and the unremitting whiplash caused by the unfettered tariffing power the president claims, challenges to the IEEPA tariffs cannot await the normal appellate process," the companies argued in their request. Rick Woldenberg, the chairman and CEO of Learning Resource and hand2mind, told CNBC that the Friday Supreme Court decision "was a disappointment but honestly just another twist in the road." "You want to win every motion but sometimes you don't," he said, adding that, "ultimately this showdown will be at the Supreme Court." Trump declared a national economic emergency under the IEEPA to justify implementing his tariffs without first getting congressional approval, a strategy that has drawn legal challenges from businesses and individuals questioning his authority The U.S. Court of International Trade last month temporarily blocked Trump's tariffs, saying that the IEEPA, which became law in 1977, does not authorize a president to implement universal duties on imports. But a federal appeals court earlier this month allowed Trump's tariffs to remain in effect until it hears arguments on that case at the end of next month. — CNBC's Lori Ann Wallace contributed reporting.
