It's also a problem with the school system.
The problem (tm):
Corporate america is not getting the "Qualified applicants" it needs straight from the public school system. (full stop)
Analysis:
Corporate america wants universal employees. (what they really mean by "qualified applicant") It wants to not think about employees as individuals that have a unique mixture of strengths and weaknesses, and wants a quick and easy to filter demographic that is more or less homogeneous. (Often, they also want unreasonable levels of competency or skill, at bargain basement prices, but that's another, if related, issue. The real issue is not what the standard is for the universal employee, it is that they want a universal employee.) It does not get this from the public school system. In the futile effort to get this, it has turned to higher education, since public education has proven intractable in providing it. (because it is not actually possible.) This is why you need a college degree (In anything-- doesn't matter) to get a job doing menial office tasks that are really "Jobs that require little training, and no real degree of skill" but do require basic competency in written communication and mathematics, as well as the ability to faithfully follow instructions. This shift in tactics has resulted in the ever ballooning need for education credentials, the failure of the higher learning academic system to meet that demand, and the resulting upward spiral of tuition and debt, just to get said terrible office jobs. It is also why employers *STILL* cannot find "qualified applicants".
Real problem:
Corporate America wants something that they cannot legitimately expect to have-- Universal, interchangeable, and faceless employees.
They have lobbied the government very hard to try and manipulate education to attain this holy grail, and refuse to accept that this is impossible.
They refuse to accept that this is impossible, because it would force them to have to evaluate each candidate that comes through the door, and the separation of job skills in the office environment means that the person doing the hiring is not able to properly make the evaluation for specific roles within the company in a meaningful way. (If you are hiring an EE to design novel circuits for you, they do not need to be extremely chipper, jovial, or to be able to answer bullshit softskill questions. They need to drop useful solutions down for difficult electronic logic problems in a timely manner, and do so reliably and with little fuss. The HR woman cannot evaluate this guy; He literally spends all his time designing novel circuits; She has no idea what a diode is. He does not talk about other things. He's actually rather dull as a person, but he's the person you really want for this role. Naturally, HR dismisses his application after the interview stage, because he's just so odd (HR woman just cannot understand him as a person), and therefor "Not a good fit".)
They also want universal, interchangeable, and faceless employees so that they can leverage employee markets in other countries, to maximize on profit generation. Being tied to a specific locality, because that is where the talent is, gives them nightmares. Especially if that region has a high cost of living, and commands high wages.
The delusion that this is possible is what drives things like H1B abuse, where diploma mills in other countries (which will remain nameless) shit out people with literally worthless credentials, and perform terribly (but are substantially less expensive for the employer) to get mass inducted into sophisticated projects. Naturally, it causes chaos, and corporate america does not understand why. (or rather, refuses to understand why.)
This demand for an unattainable ideal of a universally competent bottom level employee has manifestations in the public education sector, in such things as "No child left behind" and "basic competencies" requirements from the federal government.
Children are HIGHLY variable. No two perform alike. Expecting identical performance metrics from something that divergent is madness. But that is where we are.
Personally, I would MUCH rather see education not focus on this bullshit and unattainable "Universal employee" model, and focus instead on a matrix-breakdown scoring system, where individual students are constantly evaluated and properly placed within the maximally performant categories of academic accomplishment, then given a final matrix evaluation upon completion, followed by optional higher learning credentials, which are voluntarily chosen by the student.
That way, the EE with the softskills deficit has something to show HR that "Hey, look, I can fucking run CIRCLES around other people in my discipline", instead of being expected to be an idealized "perfect employee" that is well spoken, dresses very nicely, smells nice, is witty and personable, **AND** just so happens to also be able to do the job hired for and can also do any other job that middle management wants done, and of course-- never complains or causes trouble of any kind-- that HR is currently looking for, for every position. Including janitor. HR instead gets handed a scoring breakdown range, she checks the candidate's educational score matrix, and if it's in the allowed tolerances, she puts it in the callback pile (where it belongs.) She is told straight up that appearance means precisely dick. That's not what he is hired to do.
It also means that the person with strong communication skills, that is very outgoing, etc--- is placed in careers best suited to them, like sales.
It also, of course, means that people that simply do poorly *IN EVERYTHING*, get properly identified as such, and get the proper social support they need as adults instead of going into homeless shelters when they cannot find or keep work, -- or from ending up in situations of sexual exploitation, or lives of crime.
Pulling the fantasy of the universal employee out of the minds of employers though has proven to be intractable. I expect they will bankrupt the entire country before they accept that it is impossible, and probably NOT EVEN THEN.