The cost of being too experienced at work

Mid-level managers are vanishing as firms chase productivity through cuts, automation, and a preference for younger, cheaper hires

- Callum Borchers

Belt-tightening is overused corporate jargon, but it is particularly apt at the moment. The midsection of America's workforce is getting squeezed.

Not accomplished enough for senior leadership roles but too experienced (and expensive) for the front-line positions artificial intelligence hasn't replaced, many mid-career professionals suddenly find themselves in no-man's-land.

Amazon this week laid off 14,000 office workers in a step toward cutting as many as 30,000 desk jobs. Phrases like "reducing bureaucracy" and "removing layers" appeared in a memo to employees, so it is not difficult to guess which kinds of roles are likely to be eliminated.

Target, United Parcel Service and Booz Allen Hamilton are just a few of the other major employers to announce white-collar staff reductions recently.

This marks what could be a major turning point for the U.S. workforce. Gone are the days when employers would hoard talented employees or worry about being understaffed for the good times.

Now, cost-conscious businesses are trying to get flat, aiming to boost productivity. And when companies need to fill openings, they are eager to find people with just enough know-how—and no more.

This explains why I keep hearing from job seekers who say they've been rejected for being overqualified.

When a job description calls for 10 to 15 years of experience, 25-year veterans aren't necessarily seen as better-than-expected prospects. They're often viewed as applicants who will ask for too much money and leave as soon as they find opportunities commensurate with their long CVs.