Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →The headline’s “last year” refers to 2013. Computerworld published the story on January 16, 2014, and it reported an estimated drop of 35,000 people working as electrical engineers in the United States during that year. The figure is a historical snapshot, not a measure of today’s job market, and it does not on its own prove or disprove a STEM shortage.
What the headline actually reports
The story was written by Patrick Thibodeau and attributed the labor figures to an analysis by IEEE-USA of data from the U.S. Department of Labor. It quoted Ron Hira, an assistant professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, who argued that the employment trend undercut claims of a broad shortage of science, technology, engineering and math workers. The piece ran as a 2014 policy argument, and it should be read that way: a dated estimate, attributed to a secondary report of a trade group’s analysis, used to make a point about policy.
Two details matter before any number is discussed. First, the 35,000 figure is an estimated change in headcount, not a count of job openings or layoffs. Second, the underlying calculation is not reproduced in the Computerworld article, so readers are relying on the reporting of IEEE-USA’s analysis rather than on a published Labor Department table.
The figures as reported
The article gives the following numbers. Each is tied to the year and source stated in the report.
| Measure | Value as reported | Year or period | Attribution and qualification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Change in people working as electrical engineers | 35,000 fewer | 2013 | IEEE-USA analysis of U.S. Labor Department data, as described by Computerworld (January 16, 2014) |
| Percentage decline in employment | 10.4% | 2013 (the “last year” in the article) | Same attribution as above |
| Electrical-engineer unemployment rate | 3.4% | 2012 | Same attribution as above |
| Electrical-engineer unemployment rate | 4.8% | 2013 | Same attribution as above |
| People working as electrical engineers | 300,000 | Year of the report (2013 data) | Same attribution; compared with 385,000 in 2002 |
The numbers are internally consistent. A drop of 35,000 that equals 10.4% implies a starting level of roughly 335,000, which is what you get by adding 35,000 back to a 300,000 end figure. Measured against the 385,000 reported for 2002, the reported employment level fell by about 22% over that span. That arithmetic is only as reliable as the underlying estimates, and the article does not explain how the series was constructed or whether the 2002 and 2013 counts used identical occupational definitions.
What the numbers do not show
Three distinctions separate the headline from a broader claim about shortages.
Headcount is not the same as unemployment
A falling number of people working in an occupation can reflect fewer openings, people leaving the field, retirements, or a shrinking base of job holders. An unemployment rate measures something else: the share of people looking for work who cannot find it. The article reports both, and they moved in the same direction in the same period. Rising unemployment among electrical engineers is evidence of weaker conditions for that group, but it does not isolate why.
One occupation is not a STEM field
Electrical engineering is one occupation within a large and varied group. A trend in one occupation cannot establish conditions across science, technology, engineering and math. NSPE’s March 2014 feature, “The STEM Report Card,” made this point directly, describing outcomes as differing among disciplines. It noted that some fields may have fewer graduates than available jobs while others show the opposite pattern, and it cited the electrical-engineering report as one example.
Attributed opinion is not a finding
Hira’s statements in the article are his interpretation of the reported data. He said that claims of STEM worker shortages “have no support in fact and no connection to reality,” and he described the trend as “truly disturbing.” Those are arguments made by one academic in a 2014 policy debate. They are useful for understanding that debate, but they are not a consensus position, and they should not be read as a verified conclusion about the labor market in any later year.
Why the 2014 debate matters for personal finance
For most readers, the question is not whether a shortage existed in 2013. It is whether a single headline should shape a decision that costs years and tens of thousands of dollars, such as choosing a degree, paying for a graduate program, or switching careers. Those decisions depend on a few things a one-year headcount change cannot tell you.
Rank #4
- Multi-year trends in employment, not one year’s change, and whether the series has recovered, stabilized or kept falling.
- Unemployment for the occupation compared with the overall unemployment rate for the same year, which shows whether the occupation is doing better or worse than the economy as a whole.
- Wage data for the occupation and for entry-level positions, which reflects whether employers are competing for workers.
- The total cost of a degree, including interest on any loans, against realistic starting pay in the field.
- Adjacent occupations that use the same training, since a trend in one job title can understate demand for closely related skills.
How to check current figures before you decide
- Start with the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook, which publishes projections and wage and employment data for individual occupations, and check the date on each figure.
- Pull the Bureau of Labor Statistics employment and unemployment series for the occupation across at least ten years, not one year.
- Compare the occupation’s unemployment rate with the overall unemployment rate for the same period.
- Look up entry-level pay in the occupation and the typical tuition and loan balances for the programs you are considering, then calculate the payback period.
- Check the job market for closely related occupations so that a weak year in one title does not rule out the skills you would build.
This article does not establish current conditions for electrical engineers. The figures discussed here are from a January 2014 report covering 2013, and the Labor Department series they came from have been updated many times since. Anyone making a decision in 2026 should use the current data for their own region and occupation definition.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.The takeaway
The headline is accurate to the figures it reports, but it answers a narrow question: how many people worked as electrical engineers in the United States in 2013, and how that compared with earlier years. It does not answer whether the country faced a STEM shortage, and it cannot tell a reader whether electrical engineering is a sound financial choice today. The more useful lesson is methodological. Check the year, the population, and the measure before accepting a claim about jobs, and treat any single-occupation statistic as one input among several.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
