Training is seen as competitive suicide, because while you bear the costs of training, your competitors can then poach your trained employees by offering a salary that is less than your total cost for that employee but more than the salary you pay that employee.
X = cost to train employee
Y = salary of employee
Competitor pays Z such that Y < Z < Y+X and puts you out of business.
The second factor is that if you raise wages for one person, then the rest of your workforce expects those wages. So a 10% salary increase for one person quickly becomes an across the board 10% bump on your personnel costs.
Bribing, lobbying, paying PR firms, pulling the wool over people's eyes is all judged to be a smaller expense and a worthwhile cost-saving measure.
The economically viable solution is to have schools do the training, but universities are likely not the best model for getting good tech workers.
X = cost to train employee
Y = salary of employee
Competitor pays Z such that Y < Z < Y+X and puts you out of business.
The second factor is that if you raise wages for one person, then the rest of your workforce expects those wages. So a 10% salary increase for one person quickly becomes an across the board 10% bump on your personnel costs.
Bribing, lobbying, paying PR firms, pulling the wool over people's eyes is all judged to be a smaller expense and a worthwhile cost-saving measure.
The economically viable solution is to have schools do the training, but universities are likely not the best model for getting good tech workers.