They really are, when every employer insists on 3 years' experience with a 3-year-old product and only 10% of candidates started on day 1. That's how you get 90% of experienced candidates unemployed while 90% of roles remain unfilled.
Especially unless they want to pay for it. Most experienced people already have all the jobs they need. No one else is going to train your employees for you. You don't want to pay the premium? Hire on potential and award those that do well. I don't know how many of my friends in these kinds of roles had their pay stagnate while the company were hiring e.g. consultant. Eventually they leave and things gets even worse for the company when the new project fails, because now they don't have either old or new infrastructure working properly.
Wait you mean companies should pay for training? That's unpossible. I thought training on high level systems just happened by unemployed people taking free Youtube courses or paying for their own training. Why are we asking so much from companies. It's bad enough we only give them massive tax breaks but now we want them to train people? What's next paying them well for experience? /s
Yes, AND one more factor no one is mentioning: resume inflation. If people read that they need several years of experience in a product or tech that's only several years old, like Kubernetes for example, then they will start to lie. And since they start to lie, others feel they should lie, too. The moral of the story is: tech management frequently doesn't know what it's doing.