This Week in Jobs: Reading Between the Jobs Numbers (Can We Trust It?)

The headline jobs numbers look reassuring... until you dig into the revisions. 

We break down what the new BLS report actually says, why the quiet corrections matter, and how ADP payroll data shifts the picture. Then the bigger question: what does a healthy monthly jobs number even mean when some economists think we may need near-zero net new jobs to stay stable?

We get specific about where the labor market is genuinely tight. Skilled trades are shrinking as retirements outpace the number of new apprentices, and AI-driven data center construction is making demand even harder to meet. Meanwhile, healthcare continues to account for a disproportionate share of job growth, masking just how uneven hiring is across industries and experience levels.

On AI: entry-level roles are especially exposed, and the shift may show up as slower hiring rather than dramatic layoffs. Our latest employee mindset survey finds people say they're satisfied at work, but many have only a few months of savings, and those closest to AI feel the most threatened.

We close with the job search reality: LinkedIn scams, fake recruiters, and the "spray and pray" application trap, plus practical ways to actually stand out.

If this hit home, subscribe, share it with someone in the job market, and leave a review. What part of today's job market feels most broken to you?

Additional Resources:
1. Q2 2026 Employee Mindset Survey
2. Gallup: State of the Global Workplace 2026
3. WSJ: Why More People Are Dropping Out of the Job Market

📽️ WATCH TODAY'S EPISODE ON YOUTUBE: https://youtube.com/live/lXs5r6Q4jjE

🧠 WANT TO LEARN MORE? Be sure to subscribe and check out 4 Corner Resources at https://www.4cornerresources.com/

👋 FOLLOW PETE NEWSOME ONLINE:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petenewsome/
Blog Articles: https://www.4cornerresources.com/blog/  

Transcript

Welcome And What We Cover

Pete Newsome 0:03

All right, Peter, we are live for this week in the job market. How are you today?

Peter Porebski 0:08

I'm doing well. How are you doing?

Pete Newsome 0:10

I'm doing good. I'm doing good. But we're not gonna just start with this week. We're we're gonna go backwards to go forward. We're gonna talk about the jobs report that came out last week. Did you see it?

Peter Porebski 0:20

I did. Uh I did it. It kind of feeds in nicely, and I know we'll talk about this later with uh with our four corner survey. So I'm glad you're starting off with that.

Pete Newsome 0:29

Yeah, so here's the problem: no one believes the numbers. The BLS put out a jobs report, said that we added 178,000 jobs, and nobody believes it. What's your take on that?

Peter Porebski 0:42

Yeah, I think that um I'll say lately uh we have had a lot of um of distrust in official sources. So especially with, you know, what was it months ago when when there was that huge variance that they had to correct? I mean that's happened now multiple times, but uh I think people are uh are definitely they're definitely skeptical, we'll say the official numbers.

Pete Newsome 1:07

Yeah, well, all right, I have the numbers. I've looked because when I when I post videos about this, I get everyone saying those jobs aren't real, though that's not true. Of the last 24 months, how many times have the job numbers been revised by the Bureau of Labor Statistics? After the facts, they put out original numbers and then they revise them quietly at the bottom of the report. How many times in the last 24 months have they revised them?

Peter Porebski 1:35

I'm gonna guess uh three times.

Pete Newsome 1:41

You're you're way off. You gotta you gotta go higher.

Peter Porebski 1:44

Let's say uh at least that let I know I know of uh from talking to a couple of managers that there's been at least six.

Pete Newsome 1:51

Uh you're not you're still not close. You have to stretch here. You have to come on, every it's it's the government we're talking about. How many times have they revised the numbers?

Peter Porebski 2:00

It can't be every single one of them, can it?

Pete Newsome 2:02

It is not every single one, but you're you're you're still not even in the ballpark.

Peter Porebski 2:06

Well, I mean six of the seven of them have been uh I feel like really bad.

Pete Newsome 2:13

All right, we're gonna we're gonna burn through the whole the whole show of doing it this way. 22 of the last 24 months, they have revised the numbers after the fact. And guess how many times they've revised them upwards?

Peter Porebski 2:28

Zero.

Pete Newsome 2:29

Two.

Peter Porebski 2:31

Now, you know, there was a there was it's funny that you say because I was just talking to my father this weekend, uh this past weekend, and he was like, Well, I only saw on the news that there was there was two or three revisions uh you know over the last year or so. So why isn't it being covered?

Pete Newsome 2:48

Why do you think it's not being covered, right? Who sets the narrative of all this? The the administration puts this these numbers out, they they boast about them when they can, right? So we just added 178,000 jobs in March. That's the headline number, and everyone's supposed to celebrate, but then quietly at the bottom of the BLS report, which is where I go first now.

Peter Porebski 3:08

I I don't start at the top anymore because now that you've seen it, you're like, go to the asterisk at the bottom.

Pete Newsome 3:13

I go to I go to the bottom. That is a much more interesting number. That's the one that is true mostly, right? Because what happens is once a year they revise them again. And that's what happened. I think that's what you were referring to a minute ago. Yeah. Where they revised down the 2024 numbers by I think 800,000, something like that. So here's the thing. What I also find, I won't say amusing because this is serious stuff and it's and it's not good that it happens. But everyone now says Trump administration don't trust him at all. And when I was posting this a year ago or a year and a half ago, everyone would say the Biden administration, we don't trust these numbers at all. But when you look back at the last 10 years of revised BLS data, as only I have probably, because why would you want to look at that? Um, you find that this has been going on a long time. That this is just what they do. And I don't think it's dishonesty and deception as much as it is disorganization. I think that it's the federal government we're talking about here. No one should be surprised that they're not very efficient.

Peter Porebski 4:16

Yeah, I that's what I whenever I hear people that say like it's not, I don't think it's a big conspiracy theory, I think it's the it's the simplest explanation, is usually the right one, and it's just that people are disorganized and it's a group of people.

Pete Newsome 4:28

Well, it's it's uh the federal government is just not efficient at what they do, and they they put these numbers out, they try to hit uh a date that they've committed to in the um in advance, and then and then they then they don't have accurate data. I mean, that's what they claim anyway, and I I think that's mostly true, but I I should think I do think there should be more accountability for the corrections. They they should they should talk about those so we really know what's going on because companies make decisions based on these uh reports, based on this data.

Peter Porebski 4:58

And I think that if they point if they were more forthcoming about it and saying, hey, you know, we can get it most of the way there, but we're gonna come back, we're gonna correct it, and we're gonna have accurate numbers after the fact, you know, these are the real numbers. I think people might, and maybe that's that's the the issue from the people I've talked to. They're like, well, I don't trust it because they try to hide it when they if they were more open and they said, you know, it's a data collection process, it takes time, we've got to do X, Y, and Z. Maybe I'd trust it more. And and that seems to be kind of the the overall theme of people I've talked to, at least.

ADP Data And The Zero Jobs Claim

Pete Newsome 5:31

Yeah, no, no one no one trusts them at this point. But for anyone listening, I I do want you to know it's not tied to any specific administration. Don't trust them.

Peter Porebski 5:40

Something has never changed. This is a constant.

Pete Newsome 5:43

Now we do we do tend to rely more on the ADP data, right? Because ADP to ADP is is independent, they base their data on payroll, actual payroll numbers that they have as the largest payroll company. And they said this week in their weekly update or their their most recent update that we added 26,000 jobs. Um that's so that's a good number. I mean, I think people, you know, in a week, right? So so do we trust that more because they're private?

Peter Porebski 6:12

Well, they are. I mean, they are a payroll company, so I I guess they have a little bit more of a the perception is that they have a little bit more of a reason to get it right initially, and they don't they don't have as much leeway as the federal government does. So uh right, wrong, or indifferent, most people seem to think that the ADP is a little bit more accurate.

Pete Newsome 6:34

Yeah, that that's that's what's going on. So far, so good in the year. But here's an interesting report that came out this week. I'm I'm not sure if you saw this. That well, let me ask if you what do you think a successful job uh number would be for a month? How many jobs do we need to add? There's a historical number that everyone has sort of pointed to as deciding whether it's a good month or not. But how what would you say that number is? So we just added 178,000. We lost 133,000 in February, so that's certainly not good. But how many a month do you think we need to have to consider it a thriving economy?

Peter Porebski 7:10

I mean, shouldn't it be around 100,000?

Pete Newsome 7:13

So historically, 150 to 200 is the number that that everyone looks to. But the Fed posted again quietly, because this got no press. And the only reason I I saw it is because I looked at the Fed's website to see this data, but very little press where they said the economy needs essentially zero new jobs each month to be okay. How crazy is that? Like, no, no one would have seen that.

Peter Porebski 7:40

I guess they're uh they're then saying that there shouldn't be any loss. Is that what that's meant to mean?

Pete Newsome 7:46

Well, it's due it's due to the declining workforce and and the the stricter immigration policies. That that's what it is. So it's not so we have less people in need of of work, but who do you think who's in the job market right now would would find comfort in that, right?

Peter Porebski 8:03

Yeah, the the the they're they're saying that the population, the working population is shrinking so that we don't need to add any more jobs. We've got too many jobs if if we're if we're adding effectively.

Pete Newsome 8:14

And you know, so what's happened is when you look at the data, you see that we have too many job seekers in the wrong place right now, and and we have too many openings where there aren't enough people to fill them, and those are primarily in skilled trades, where there are more people leaving the workforce who are qualified to do many of those jobs than there are people entering it. And that is a I'll say it's a problem now, but it is certainly a problem that is going to grow over time. I mean, this this is a and it's a bad thing. Like we're we're in trouble. We're not gonna have enough tradespeople in the very near future. Good luck when you need a plumber or an electrician at your house because they're not gonna be available.

Peter Porebski 8:56

Are you seeing that that's uh location based, or is that kind of just an all-over? I mean, because you can think of you know a small town that you know that you hear the factory closes or something. So people are displaced from that, but you know, there are needs in another area, and those people are just aren't willing to move across the country. So is that kind of what you're seeing?

Pete Newsome 9:14

No, well, this is really tied to a couple of things. So we have education bias that has existed for at least one generation, maybe maybe two. I'd say probably two.

Peter Porebski 9:25

My whole generation.

The Skilled Trades Shortage Explained

Pete Newsome 9:26

So yeah, I uh you know, my generation, so you're you're in between, right? You're a millennial, I'm X, my kids are Z. And it certainly has existed predominantly for generation Z. Now, the new generation alpha, I think it's changing. It is changing. We've seen data on that, where parents, even for students who are strong performers in high school. So the so the the way it's been historically, of course, is when if you're if you're a good student, if you're a decent student, you've been told go to college, right? That that's what's expected of you. That's how you're going to secure your career uh professionally, your life financially. That has been the default answer for certainly exceptional students, but even decent students. And and so it was seen as a bad thing if you didn't go to college. My generation, your generation, Gen Z. And so we have all these students who go to college, and the data overwhelmingly says that kids choose degrees that they think are going to provide security for them on the on the other side of that college degree. So they choose business degrees, generic business degrees, which effectively qualify you to do nothing, specifically in the real world. And there's more people coming out of school looking for those jobs, and there are jobs available. That is happening right now, and so that's where so many frustrated young people um exist in the job market because the demand isn't there. Meanwhile, the trades jobs where there's great demand, and we'll talk about why in a second, there's not enough people going uh that route to fill the opening. So it's a it's a problem.

Peter Porebski 11:06

Yeah, I mean, that's that's been an issue that I've seen time and time again, where people are just told go to school. And you know, I think it's not even necessarily that everyone has said you have to go to college versus not. It's that the historically, from what I've seen, trade schools are just not advertised as much. There a lot of people I've uh that I've talked to just over time, Canada's, and they're like, I didn't even realize that trade schools were an option or that apprenticing as a trade was an option because it just not that anybody discouraged me from it, but they just didn't know about it. They didn't know that there was one in their area or until it was like they had already gone to college or something like that.

Pete Newsome 11:46

Well, I I can tell you, my wife, who I'm sure is not listening right now, uh, was would have said it would was not be at all pleased if I had uh encouraged my kids to go in a different route, right? Because that's just again, wasn't the default thing. And so you see, high school counselors, the the high school where my kids have gone, tell you before you even enter as a freshman, they put up on a screen, here's here's all the colleges, you know. So this percentage, 98% of the kids go to college, as if that is that's the marker by which they measure success. Where that's we now know is not at all the marker you should be using. So we have that. We have this education bias that's existed. We have an older generation who's retiring. So many people who are 55 plus have pulled out of the workforce early. Uh, we we know that that has happened too. A lot of people didn't come back after COVID. Um, and now we have people in skilled trades retiring faster than they're being replaced. And it's not like you can just show up tomorrow and be a qualified electrician. You have to go through an apprenticeship, you have to go through years of learning. And we're in trouble. It's not good, it's not a good situation.

Peter Porebski 13:03

That's what I was I'm getting. Like that that training that needs to be uh on the forefront of these, you know, trade schools. Just a lot of these apprentice programs, the way they're set up is kind of in an antiquate, uh antiquated way that it's it requires a lot of time. They're not good at onboarding, they're not good at recruiting for students, the same way that a college is. In colleges have entire recruiting departments, and I'm not even getting gonna get into like people going because of sports teams about the you know, seeing all of that. But I I have lots of friends who are in the trades and they they kind of just fell into it, or their parent was somebody who was in it and they knew somebody, and it was a networking type thing. Nobody that I know like just decided it because they didn't know it was an option as a kid. It was it's always kind of been a you're you know somebody, and so you go into it.

AI Data Centers And Two Hot Sectors

Pete Newsome 13:51

Well, we're we're we're gonna have a difficult time bridging that gap, and there's really not a good solution for one thing we haven't talked about right now is the increased demand. So we already had a problem, a trending problem where people were retiring, not enough young people were entering skilled trades, and demographically we're gonna have an issue. And now on top of that, we have the AI data centers that are being built, and they are sucking up all the talent in that space. So you asked about people moot migrating from a small town, or is this a uh a geographic problem? It's not that as much as it is just supply and demand. And the demand right now is being sucked up by these the data center construction. So that's why we see construction numbers high. There's really only two sectors that are driving the whole market right now. Back to the jobs report for a minute. Healthcare was 76,000 of the 178 that were added. However, most of those were due to a physician's office strike that that um that was in place the month before. That caused the February numbers to go down artificially, so to speak. And then they artificially inflated last month. So that's what's going on there. So healthcare is driving the entire market. Without healthcare, for the past year at least, the numbers would be well, the numbers have been dismal, but they would they would be significantly worse. And then construction. So the AI boom, and whether we we could talk about, I don't know how much we'll get into it today, how much AI is affecting the job market, but in that particular space, and the uh David Sachs, who is has been the AI czar, although I think he recently had to step out of that role, he has loved saying how AI is creating jobs specifically because of construction. Well, yes, it is construct in a very roundabout way, right?

Peter Porebski 15:36

The AI is creating a need for once those are built, the jobs go away, though.

Pete Newsome 15:41

Exactly. Now the good news is that's that's okay. Those those um those skilled trades workers will be uh have plenty of opportunities, but right now that is artificially um increasing the demand there. But um anyway, it's it's it's it's a challenge. It's it's going to be not a good thing for our country over the next decade, maybe longer.

Peter Porebski 16:04

Yeah, there we're we're definitely in a transitional uh or going into a transit. I'd say we're already in it in a transitional period for for jobs. Like you said, healthcare is really the only one that's kind of constant, and that's feeds into people retiring, the popular population getting older. That's an area where it's it's never people are always gonna get sick. So that is an area that's a little bit uh more resilient, I think, than uh than some of the other ones.

unknown 16:29

All right.

Pete Newsome 16:29

So before we move on, we have a we have a comment on this, and it is small on my screen. Can you read it? This is from Brian. It says one thing we see as well as a trending habit of people wanting to earn more for less work. Well, don't we all wait? Don't we all? I mean, right? I want to earn more for less. I mean, but yes, I don't want to, I don't want to go uh, I'm not a boomer, okay? I'm not. I'm solid middle of the pack Gen Z. Let me make that clear. But I do, I can sound like an old old man when I talk about work ethic and and having to start at the bottom and work your way up. So I I agree with that. I mean, look, we're in we're in a world where instant gratification is a thing. So it's natural, or shouldn't it maybe not natural, none of it's natural about about phones and and and the internet and and how that's impacted our lives. Far from natural, but it certainly is to be expected that that instant gratification would carry over to your professional life, right? Every aspect of your life. So what is what does he say here? Let's say um I think that uh trades are turning back into a trend for the amounts of money people are realizing they can make in them. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, there's really no point.

AI Job Loss Risks And What Comes Next

Peter Porebski 17:41

Yeah, that shift is it's it's still new and it's not gonna be solved for for a while. Um, but it is it's definitely that is something that I see in my personal life. I've seen lots of candidates that have kind of made career shifts, and they're like, oh, maybe I should, maybe I should go back. Now, I know I know we'll get into this, but how do you I sometimes something I worry about is as that shift becomes maybe more and more prevalent, people are talking about, oh, you can make so much money in the trades, you can do it like this. So, what about when there are lots of people that are making the shift and the supply draw, you know, is is becoming you know higher and higher and higher. It's gonna be great for people who are already experienced, who are already in there. But when there is when you are competing with 15 other apprentices for an entry-level trades job, that's where I kind of worry about that. You know, we're we're gonna have a kind of glut of people that are trying to go into the trades. It's great for anybody who is experienced, for anybody who is who's skilled in a specific and there, they are going to be able to name their own price. But yeah, there's gonna be there's gonna be um some friction, I think, as people try to get into it. Same with same with really any entry level.

Pete Newsome 18:51

Well, look, we the the market is shifting um in in multiple directions right now. So we're we're seeing, of course, everything we've talked about with with skilled trades, and then AI is impact. So Boston Consulting Group put out a report this week that said 55% of jobs will be impacted by AI. I I think that's probably low. I I think it's closer to 100%. But what was alarming to me from the report was they said 10 to 15 job percent of jobs in the next two to three years could be completely wiped out. And when you run that map, right, if you think, okay, we have around 170 million people in the US workforce right now, 10%. That that is devastating. If it's on the low side and it could be it could be higher, but even a couple of million jobs displaced in that short of a time frame, uh it goes by in a blank.

Peter Porebski 19:48

And and I know they they talked about entry level specifically in that report, you know, but where they said 61% of the roles that were gonna be replaced were gonna be considered entry level or associate level. So it's gonna be it's gonna be a very uh interesting, I'll say to be positive on it, but it's gonna I think it's gonna be a rough time for for a lot of a lot of trades. And it's gonna be people are going to need to be willing to shift into other adjacent maybe careers. And I think you know, like they said, you said it's gonna be 100%. I definitely think it's a hundred percent. It'll be they say reshaped. I assume that means significant changes to the job.

Pete Newsome 20:27

Augmented, right? And and that that is going to have so many different meanings by by company, by by position type, by industry. I mean, there is not this is certainly not a one size fits all scenario that we're entering into with AI. Um, that I think we're solidly in right now. I also think that doesn't get enough press where we see what big companies are doing. So everyone's seen the layoffs by now so far this year. Meta very publicly, block very publicly, laid off 40% of their staff. So we see these big companies in the announcements, but what doesn't get any press because no one and there's no path by which you would announce these things for small businesses. Small to medium businesses are adopting AI at scale. They're doing it rapidly, and they're doing it quietly because there's no outlet to report that information. So my strong belief is that this is happening with a lot more frequency uh and volume than is getting reported right now.

Peter Porebski 21:27

Well, do you think I don't even necessarily uh know if it's in a lot of companies gonna be a you know massive layoffs, as much as just going forward, they're just not gonna where they would have hired two people, they'll they'll hire one person. You know, that's and that's not gonna be reported. It's just it's a lot more of a murky number to kind of see, especially like you said, in small companies.

Pete Newsome 21:48

Well, it and so many people are skeptical of it. They don't think it's happening at all. They they say, Well, these companies are just AI washing.

Peter Porebski 21:55

If you're if you haven't heard that challenge, that's what I was gonna say, ask you what do you think about people that say, well. Well, the company's saying they blame everything on, oh, we're laying off people because of AI, whereas in the past they would have just said it was because we had a bad quarter or something.

Pete Newsome 22:08

Right. So so the perspective on that is it's just being used as an excuse, as an excuse to cut. No one's gonna get upset if you say you're doing it because of AI, because that's what you're expected to do these days.

Peter Porebski 22:19

Yeah, because then well then their stock goes up because there are other companies doing well while laying off people.

Pete Newsome 22:23

And and these are companies who are making a lot of money right now while they're announcing these layoffs, and we're not used to seeing that. Usually these cuts happen when companies are stressed financially. And so the the I would say it's about a 50-50 split. What isn't these days in our country, right? Where half people out there think they're just saying that, but it's not really because of because of AI. And listen, that's not my perspective. I think that's a really dangerous view to have right now, to believe that this is a temporary thing. It's anything but this is only going to pick up speed, and it's happening so rapidly that I mean, many like, and I'm included in this, can barely even keep up with the state of progress right now.

Peter Porebski 23:08

Yep. And um, you know, and I know Brian had had commented again, um, basically saying that that's what's happening, uh, the entry level, it's kind of what happened in cybersecurity and it um because it became the hot direction, and that now people are struggling to find entry-level roles in it because everybody was like, oh, cybersecurity is the thing. Um, and it's becoming it's becoming difficult, difficult because there's so many people getting into entry-level IT.

Pete Newsome 23:36

Yeah, I mean, and I this hits close to home for me because of my son who is uh getting his master's in cybersecurity, where he has told me that his class at UCF that they're struggling to find jobs, struggling to find opportunities. And and so you see the press. I mean, I just saw a report last week that was saying how cybersecurity for entry level is absolutely the way to go. How many companies out there are hiring entry level for anything right now? And that's also affecting the job market for young people getting out of school. Going back to that for a minute, where the jobs that are easiest for AI to replace are low-level positions, positions that require a lot of repetition. Um, that's where you cut your teeth. That's where you start off. No one gives you great strategic responsibility from day one when you start off in your profession. You start at the bottom, at least that's how it's supposed to work and historically has. And those are the roles that AI is replacing. So we have this compounding problem, uh, which is going to lead to even more problems in the future because I feel very strongly about that.

Peter Porebski 24:40

That's how do you get how do you get people who can make judgment that can do these advanced things if they never spent the time doing the repetitive stuff that you know you can, yeah, sure, it's great to replace AI. But what about in 10 years when you have no, you know, you replace all of your paralegals or or entry-level law law people, and they've never how do you get an experienced lawyer if nobody ever spent any of their initial time do like working through that? It's it's it's gonna be it's gonna be crazy to see. I'll say that.

Pete Newsome 25:09

Yeah, so here we are. It's it's we're at the beginning of Q2. Let me let me ask you to make a prediction here. What do you think the job market is gonna look like as a result of AI by the end of this year? So we have just under nine months left.

Peter Porebski 25:24

So I don't I think in in this year, uh I'll be I'll be optimistic. I'll say that there's not gonna be any major upsets in the next six months, but I think we are gonna continue on this trend where companies are just going to hire less. I think that our the jobs numbers will go down, but I don't think it's gonna be dramatic enough that anybody's gonna be sounding alarm bells. That's kind of where I see that. I'll I'll hedge my bets a little bit.

Pete Newsome 25:50

So I I say by the end of this year, it's good it's going to be so prevalent that we're gonna see the federal government try to step in. And that's already started, right? If you saw a report that came out, I think it was about I don't know, a month ago, maybe six weeks now, someone wrote on Twitter basically a warning of saying this is more impactful than most people realize. It was supposedly written for family and friends. It was it was a really interesting way of describing the impact that AI is having, how effective it is, and and what it's going to do, the job market in the very near future. And this thing blew up, it had over 100 million views on on X. And immediately after Congress started weighing in. And that was the hot thing that week where they were talking about we need to step in and do something about it. We need to prevent prevent this. Well, the train has left the station. It's gonna be interesting.

Peter Porebski 26:48

How are they going? How do they plan on doing that? And you know, I know we're uh we haven't gotten to it yet, but I want to do want to talk about our survey a little bit just because that was a specific area where we saw that when at when we were asking people about if they thought AI was going to be a problem or affect their job, it's it's the executives who are actually the ones who are the most um threatened by it. They were, you know, two and a half times more than anybody else. They were the people, and maybe that's because they could just they're paying attention to all of this. So you've got the people who are up there, and they're like, I see this coming. Entry level are maybe a little bit more in the trenches, so they're not realizing it as much.

Pete Newsome 27:23

So the short the short answer to the Congress thing is I have no idea, but they're going to try. And that's so that's my prediction between now and the end of the year is that the the job market continues to struggle. We have a lot of external factors going on right now that aren't helping right between the tariffs, whatever the war is or is not is not from day to day. That you know, if it gets worse, that could be disastrous for the for the job market. Let's hope that doesn't happen. But at current rate, let's assume there's no big external factor that happens beyond what what already has. I think this is going to continue to chip away and it will pick up pace because we we have never seen anything like this before. I've been in the technology world, um, whether through staffing or or prior working for a large IT distributor that I did for years, that I've never I've been around technology my whole career and really have seen you know the internet um bubble and then and then a lot of we saw a lot of companies go go bust. And we're gonna see a lot of turnover with companies. I mean, there's new ones being created in a way that they never have before because it's so easy to but the pace of evolution is what we're not prepared for, and that that's what concerns me. So, yes, new jobs are and will be created by this, but there's gonna be a lot of fallout along the way, and I think it's going to catch the attention to an even more significant degree of of of the of Congress, and they're gonna try to stop it.

Peter Porebski 28:52

But I don't know that I don't know that they're Congress, who has historically uh uh uh been really good to act on on new technologies right away. Like they're gonna they're they're gonna try maybe, but it's funny because I've of all of the things I've seen, they half of them barely understand how it works in the first place.

Pete Newsome 29:07

So yeah, it was it's comical, right? When they you when you see them talk about anything that's an advanced technology, you see them weigh in on on Bitcoin, for example, right? They it's like wow, if you know what they clearly aren't really equipped to do that. When you see them weigh in on AI, same thing. But uh I this this new thing that came out, Mythos, if you saw that from um from Anthropic this week, they're terrified. I saw a report this morning that they're pulling in the heads of a lot of uh major companies to talk about this because this is a a potential cybersecurity threat. Um, advanced way to hack into any system, supposedly. And this is all happening at at and it's at it's at light speed right now.

Peter Porebski 29:52

There, yeah, I think that I I do agree. I think they're they're going to um try to put in some maybe some safeguards or something. They should have already been doing it because it's advancing at such a rate that yeah, there's by the time that they can pass anything, we'll be on to the next iteration or the iteration after that.

Pete Newsome 30:10

Yeah, that and so that right. So whether they should or not, put that aside. That's a that's a topic for a different different show. But I don't believe that they can. I I I I and if and we can't limit how what US is the US is doing because then we're gonna fall way behind other countries, and that's even worse. So it's it's going to be so that's my prediction. We'll we'll leave it there. But between now and the end of the year, I think that this is going to be much more at top of mind than it is today. Although it's and that's growing, right? We see it more in the press every day.

Employee Mindset Survey Key Findings

Peter Porebski 30:43

We'll have to we'll have to bookmark this and revisit it then. Although I suspect we'll probably have more to talk about much about this subject between then and now.

Pete Newsome 30:50

So let's get to the survey that you mentioned. And so this is our quarter to employ mindset survey. We measure a couple of different things. We measure uh employee satisfaction where they are, we measure confidence, outlook on the market in the near and long term, and then we measure AI threat. And the overall mindset went down. Yep. Uh, was that a surprise to you to see? We just got the results a week ago. It's live on our website. If you want to check it out, just go to four cornerresources.com, click on surveys, it's a top one, Q2 employee mindset survey, read through it. It's it's really interesting stuff. Um, what what surprised you about it?

Peter Porebski 31:29

It it was it was not surprising that it went down. I mean, it it didn't go down as much as I thought it would, I'll say. Um, it was not surprising that you know you could see that people went from saying overall that they're extremely satisfied to just satisfied that they're you know, there's while they're happy they're with their current job, they're worried about the job market. I mean, if you pay attention to the news, like none of this should come as any huge shock when you when you read it and you see, all right, well, people are kind of you hear you hear the term job hugging, people are clinging on to their current job because they they're they fear the unknown, they fear what's out there right now. And I think that if I had to predict what's next quarter, it'll probably continue that trend as well, unless anything major changes.

Pete Newsome 32:13

So, how much so so the survey data, two quarters in a row now, has indicated that employees like their jobs, they're happy with the roles that they have. How much of that do you think is because they're happy to have a job when they see so many people who are struggling right now? Look, there this is not a good time to find yourself unintentionally unemployed. Um and we'll talk about why in just a minute. Uh, but do you think it's because of the state of the market, or do you think people are genuinely happy where they are? I'd like to for it to be the latter. That that would be a great I'd like for it to be a ladder.

Peter Porebski 32:51

I think it's the former. Um, just I think if you if we were in a different scenario and the job market was going gangbusters, and I think you would have maybe more people that were. I don't think that they're gonna necessarily we're gonna have a lot of people that are saying they're extremely dissatisfied with their job just because if somebody is and in the job market is any is not awful, they're gonna probably try and leave and find it, the job that they can at least tolerate. Um, but I think that that number would shift down a lot more where people are maybe neutral to their job if they have the option. Right now, people are like, well, I'm uh it's better than nothing. It's a it pays the bills, it gets a you know, it's a roof over my head, all that. I'm I'm satisfied. That's what that's kind of my thought.

Pete Newsome 33:32

So there were two things that really jumped out at me from from this quarter's results. And one is tied to that, and and I think it does support the point you just made. Almost 50%, 49.5% of those who took our survey have four months or less of savings. So if they lost their job, they would have to find a new one under four months to be financially stable. That and that number jumped up significantly quarter over quarter. So savings are diminishing. Now, the the coincidentally, um the inflation uh numbers came out today, and I'll just say they're not good. We won't go down that rabbit hole. That's not what the show is about. Go look them up for yourself. CPI was announced today. It's not good. It's it's it is I'll leave it there. So people are having a difficult time saving. No surprise. It's it's this is we're not in a position to see a decline in the job market as a country right now.

Peter Porebski 34:31

I think that that that's why, yeah, people are they're not their pay is not going up, inflation is going up. That's why you're gonna see a, I think you're gonna continue to see it as long as this trend exists, a continual diminishing of the amount of savings that people have because they they while they're saving maybe the same amount, it doesn't go as far. And that's going, I think that is maybe gonna fall up to the you know back of people's minds while they just try to hold on to their job. Well, they're they're just trying to not be out in the job market if they don't want to be.

Pete Newsome 35:04

Absolutely. And and again, we'll talk about one of the things making the job market tough in just a second. But the other big point that jumped out at me was what you alluded to earlier that executives are both the most satisfied right now and afraid of AI. Also, those who are using AI the most are most concerned about how it will impact their jobs. And though that those numbers were very clear in the results.

Peter Porebski 35:32

That's I I viewed that as ignorance as bliss, I guess. If if you don't know anything about AI, you're like, well, it's it's not gonna be my problem because I don't know, I don't know anything about it. So the people who are aware and they're are maybe you know paying attention to the market, those are the ones who are a little bit they're more wary of it. And it's not surprising me that the executives they like their job, they're in a good position, they don't want it to be taken away from them. That's why they're the most worried.

Pete Newsome 35:57

Yeah, I I find it somewhat amusing that those in executive positions are least worried about losing their jobs, right? Well, why would you think that would be?

Peter Porebski 36:05

Could it be, I don't know, because they're the ones that get to decide they're the ones who decide who's gonna lose their job.

Pete Newsome 36:12

So that's that's that part is not a surprise, but those being closest to AI, using it the most, are the most concerned about um what it means going forward to the job market.

Peter Porebski 36:24

Well, it's I mean, it's no different than we're even you or I. Like we we've used AI pretty heavily, and so we can see we've seen what it can do. So you can extrapolate that out and see, okay, well, if it can do this, it can do that, that. And it's really, I mean, I I talk to people who barely use chat GPT, and they're like, Oh, it's it's pretty cool. Like, it's it can do a lot more than just rewrite your email.

LinkedIn Scams And Fake Recruiters

Pete Newsome 36:46

Yeah, yeah. I mean, that that's it's um we could we could talk for hours about that. We won't because this is about jobs. Yes, we're needing to get jobs, and so I want to touch on before we go a couple different reports that came out. One was from LinkedIn, uh, one was from Monster. So the LinkedIn one was talking about the massive number of fake accounts that are on there. Uh that fake recruiters scamming people, trying to get personal information. So let's talk about that first, and then we'll talk about how AI is impacting the job search process and how people are approaching it. Because I think that that's important, and and I think AI could actually help. But but this this link, these LinkedIn scams um are a huge problem, and and people are falling for them.

Peter Porebski 37:37

So is that are you are you surprised by that that there are that many, I guess, fake accounts on there that these are not real people?

Pete Newsome 37:47

To some degree, I am. And and I'm surprised it's working. Let me say that. Yeah. So the effort, the attempt, unfortunately, that's the way of the world in in many respects. But it it's relatively easy to look up someone's history and reputation. And so I'm surprised that people are falling for them uh for these scams, uh, the way that they are, when you can do your own research and it doesn't take a lot of time. Look at how long a company's been in business, look at how long their pages existed, look at their online reputation, Google them, so to speak. And then you can determine whether it's fake, or if you get an email from a Gmail account versus a business account. Be skeptical, don't trust those things. Now that we have the data, then this is from LinkedIn. They're they're the ones saying how many 83 million fake profiles, and they have reports of 117. They had reports of 117 million scam or spam incidents just in the first half of 2025. 170 million. That's that's that's insane.

Peter Porebski 38:54

It's crazy because well, also it's going to become, unfortunately, I think maybe people just need to become more technologically savvy because of there's now that we've got all these automation tools, even legitimate companies, they're using these automation tools because they're helpful, because they they help the move the process along. So the the bad actors can kind of wedge themselves in there, act the same way, but not to the same level. And like you said, uh people are just gonna kind of need to be responsible for doing their own research, looking it up, making sure did I apply to this company? Why are who is this random person reaching out to me? You know, it's easy, I guess, for us to say because we see it all the time. I've talked to people and you'd be surprised the uh the things that people fall for.

Spray And Pray Applications Backfire

Pete Newsome 39:36

Well, so people are applying in mass. So that let's tie these things together. It it monster just put out a report saying that the way people are 48% of job seekers are applying to as many jobs as possible instead of being selective. Monster just published that today. So I'm seeing that right now. Let me talk about that for a second. I I have heard all the complaints, I hear it all, I see the numbers. So LinkedIn, I mean 501 million in job scam losses in 2024 alone. I wanted to get that number out there too. That is crazy. So it's working, it's happening with greater frequency. Candidates, job seekers, are being encouraged to apply to as many jobs as possible. And the monster data indicates that half are, they're just spraying and praying. So I'm recruiting right now, I'm taking a look at resumes for an internal job, which is something I haven't done in a long time. And I see applications that are coming in. We make it very clear in this job posting that you have to live in Florida. Half the job seekers don't live in Florida, right? Right off the bat, people are just applying for jobs. And one of the roles that we have requires specific experience and staffing. People don't care, they're just applying. And and and you see career coaches, and I'm using air quotes, I don't know if they're on the screen, to say that encouraging people. We see software that boasts you can use it to apply for hundreds of jobs at once. So the snowball effect is just creating an absolute mess in the number of applications that are received for any you think that's because uh the historically people have said, well, it's you know, HR writes the job description and may they write that that you need five different things.

Peter Porebski 41:18

You don't actually need those five different things, and they're saying, well, the job description is actually inaccurate, you might as well apply because it's they don't actually care for those, those aren't actually requirements.

Pete Newsome 41:29

I I think people just say shoot your shot, you know, it's a numbers game. It's not because no one wins, candidates do not win. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if you apply if you're not qualified. And and I would argue, I have, and I will continue to that you should be elect as selective in your approach as a job seeker. It's not a volume, it shouldn't be. Don't approach it as a volume game, right? It it look, the job market is about supply and demand. Okay, so if you're a generalist, you don't have a specific skills, if you if you if your skills are the same as many others in the candidate pool, you're gonna have to find a way to separate yourself from the pack. And and I would argue, I will argue that you should go above and beyond. You should target certain companies, you should target the individuals in those companies to reach out to directly. Yes, that takes time, but you have to separate yourself somehow. And just send being one of a thousand resumes in a pile is not gonna do it.

Peter Porebski 42:30

Well, what do you say to somebody who then says, all right, well, I that I okay, I agree with that. I should apply to the I I'm gonna apply six jobs that I really think I'm really good for. Every one of those six jobs within a week is gonna have 300 to 400 applicants that the recruiter is then, you know, maybe that it's not no fault of their, but they're inundated with all these people. I'm not gonna even get reviewed, even though I chose to only apply to those six. So if you get kind of a a catch-22 where it's an arms race between the recruiters trying to use more tools to get to all these people, the candidates then saying, Okay, well, I need to then apply to as many jobs just to increase my chances. I don't, I don't, I don't know uh a solution to it unless one side kind of backs off.

How To Stand Out In Hiring

Pete Newsome 43:12

And yeah, I mean, so that that would I mean that would be like saying I'm gonna buy more lottery tickets. Yeah. I mean, your your chances, I mean, statistically, could it increase your chances? I guess, but your chances will remain so low it's not gonna matter, it's not gonna lead to results. So instead, find a way to differentiate yourself, find a way to stand out, consider that job, and then try to understand why they would want to hire you, right? Are you uniquely qualified? Hopefully you are, but if you're not, what do you bring to the table that other candidates may not? Recruiters want to find motivated, qualified candidates. So you have to start with that premise in mind. Yeah, recruiters are recruiters get a bad rap at times, and that they should. shouldn't. I mean, recruiters have one object. We all have a job to do. Recruiter's job is to find the candidate who's going to be hired for any particular role. Okay. Go make that recruiter's job easy for the role that you are applying to. Be get you know deliver them a custom message, right? Um, that indicates your interest in the role, why you're qualified, why they should consider you, reach out to them, send them a message on LinkedIn. Consider writing that. Now, this is gonna be unpopular and people are gonna be very dismissive of this, but I can guarantee that if our recruiters receive are working on a job and they receive a call from a candidate expressing their interest directly, you're not gonna reach the recruiter live, chances are. You might, depending on whether it's a staffing company or a corporate recruiter. If a staffing company is much better chance, you'll probably reach them live. Leave them a voicemail, tell them who you are, tell them when you applied, tell them the job, make it very easy for them to pull your resume out of the pile and express your interest. It takes a few seconds. You just look up the number, you ask for the whoever's recruiting for that job, right? You might be transferred a few times, but it's well worth it. And the reason is because no one does it. Yeah, so you're doing what everyone else does, which is just hitting one click apply, you're not gonna stand out. So shift the rules in your favor.

Peter Porebski 45:18

I think that what you said that's really good. Make their life easier. Like a recruiter wants to expend the least amount of effort to fill the most jobs. So you do you going extra, going that extra mile, making sure that your resume is really good, it matches. That's an and that's a use of AI that I tell candidates. That's something to do. Don't have it apply to all these jobs. Take a look at the job description. If you match it, make sure that oh, I didn't have this technology on there, I didn't have this skill on there, but it's on the job description. Have AI help you tailor your resume to these job descriptions so that it's very clear to the recruiter who's looking at you because they have a hundred people, this person is a really good match for the job.

Pete Newsome 45:56

Yeah, find find a way in. Do you have a connection? LinkedIn, for all the criticism it deserves, find a way to be connected to that person, right? Do you even have a friend of a friend of a friend? You have to work for it. If you now I said before it's supply and demand, if you are fortunate enough to have worked yourself into a position where you have a unique skill set where there are very few people qualified to do the jobs that you'd potentially potentially pursue, then that's entirely different, right? You you play by different rules. If you're Tom Brady, you're gonna be treated differently than if you're someone who's just hoping to get drafted, right? That's just the way it is. So we're really talking to the people who don't have a unique skill set, who are one of potentially many in a candidate pool. And you see the comments right here, right? This this shows it, Peter. If you'll read it, I'm on a I'm on a small screen. So if you'll read it.

Peter Porebski 46:55

This is, you know, this is from uh actually, this is from one of the recruiters. The the candidates who who reach out directly get my attention 100% of the time, the effort alone is usually worth the phone call. Being an easy-to-work with candidate is an underappreciated skill. And people who show that, hey, I'm gonna, I'm going to answer the phone calls, I'm going to give it my actual effort. I'm not going to be dismissive of this. That's that alone. If I've got a candidate who is I I have to call back constantly and I can't get a hold of him, versus a candidate who is always available and you know sets up the interview, is a bit is ready to go. Why would I go with you know the first one I can go with the the one who, if they've got similar skill sets, I'm gonna go with the one that's got the effort that's putting in the effort that shows that they really want it.

Pete Newsome 47:38

Yeah, because you candidates complain that employers ghost them, that recruiters ghost them. Recruiters get ghosted just as much, if not more. That's just the way it is. And so you said it make it easy, make yourself accessible, available, and express your interest. And that you see the comments, right?

Peter Porebski 47:59

That that they think it's it is you know, there is a there is problems, and there are things that need to be changed. And I just tell, like, there's no nothing that's gonna get done by you holding a grudge up. Well, the recruiters are bad, so I'm gonna have a bad attitude. Be part of the change, be better than that. If the that that is what I say to do, like, yes, maybe there will be some recruiters that are not going to get back to you that are inundated or whatever, or they're Frank. I mean, it's people. There's people who are good at their job, there's people who are bad at their job, but you kind of have to learn and not take it personally. You can only affect how you react to the situation. So that's what I I've told candidates. You need to how you approach the situation is the only thing that you can you can affect.

Pete Newsome 48:38

That's a great point. And and I said earlier, I want so I want to make the point that AI is is helping with this, where we know that people are using AI to help write the resumes. Fine, it does a good job with that. Help it match your skills with the job description. Don't lie, don't lie, please.

Peter Porebski 48:55

Yeah, it's gonna it's gonna come out if you're lying, you're just wasting time.

Pete Newsome 48:57

So you're wasting time, and and as a candidate, it is not about getting an interview, it's about getting hired. And and it's gonna come out. So don't try to beat the system and spend your time on the things that you believe you have a fair and reasonable shot at getting hired for, and then put your effort in that direction. But it but look, where whether we say it or not, what is happening is people are implying in mass, they're not really looking at the job description. So AI is actually doing a wonderful job of separating the candidates. And I saw a comment on LinkedIn yesterday by someone who I respect um a lot complaining that AI is being used in this way. And I and I didn't respond publicly, I might, to this comment, but AI is matching the skills and experience on the resume to what's required on the job description. And if a candidate is applying, like the example I mentioned, people who are disregarding that our job requires them to live in a specific area, they're applying anyway. Our job requires specific experience, they don't have it, they're applying anyway. I'm sorry. There's it's not reasonable for a human recruiter to take the time to respond to that person and let them know why they weren't qualified. It's just not. There is no company that can that can have humans doing that. Not with the volume.

Peter Porebski 50:25

That's my my my my controversial take is with one click apply. A recruiter does not owe you their time. Sorry, they don't like uh you applying to a job, clicking one button does not then mean that they need to, they will look at they will look at your resume, but they do not need to call you and go through it if you are obviously not a fit for the job.

Pete Newsome 50:42

It's just not feasible, right? It's just not you recruiter would spend all day doing that. So that's where, but AI is is able to do that without bias, right? Just matching up the criteria. AI can now reply to candidates and let them know why they weren't, why they're not being advanced for the job. I think that is an amazing use of AI in the recruiting process, and then ultimately allow the candidates who are qualified to spend time with the human recruiters. That's that's what AI is going to do for us in the job marks doing it now. It's only going to do that even better going forward. So, what technology's created a mess. LinkedIn, indeed, they've perpetuated this to a significant degree. It's gross, it's not effective. Nobody wins with one click apply, but it's a world we're in, AI can help solve it for us.

Peter Porebski 51:31

Everybody knows, I think, in this time, like your resume needs to match the job description. Your resume shows that is all we have to go on. So I think it's it's confusing to me, like you said. When people apply and they're missing, it says you need X, Y, and Z skills, their resume has none of that, or their resume is missing. Like, that's all they're gonna go on. So a screening tool that matches some of these things, like that's just base level pre-qualification questions in my mind. Like, if you don't, if you can't do that, then you know I I can't I can't help you.

Newsletter Invite And Closing

Pete Newsome 52:01

Yeah, and but and Bella says it perfectly, right? AI is helping the right candidates get in front of the recruiter, not get buried in thousands of applications. And that's coming from someone who uses this every day, uh, and is using it to take better care of candidates and the applicants. I mean, that's what that's what this is doing. So I think we've covered the basis for today, Peter. I that we've we've touched on the highlights of the job market. We're gonna do this every week. Yep. So come come back and check in with us. We send a daily newsletter. If you're not already subscribed, cornering the job market, you can get to it through the four-corner page. Check it out, it gives you all of the headlines that you need to know about what is happening. We update it every morning. We send it out usually by noon, and you'll have within a three-minute read. That's our goal. That you'll always know what's going on with the job market from the company announcements, new data as it's available, the jobs reports as they come out, whether we believe them or not, we're gonna report on them.

Peter Porebski 52:57

And then it's a nice bite-sized email. That's it, it's a like you said, three, it's a quick read and it gives you the highlights.

Pete Newsome 53:03

It's everything you need to know, and then we'll we'll tie uh tie it all together at the end of each week. So thanks for joining us today. Anything else before we close, Peter? Do we we cover it all?

Peter Porebski 53:12

I think we I think we got it all. So yeah, we'll we'll see you guys uh next week. All right, have a great weekend. Talk soon. Bye.