Losing a job is always traumatic, and that’s why stories like this one in the Chicago Tribune—titled “Are you prepared if you lose your job?”—can serve as a good jolt for anyone who thinks that they are immune from the incessant layoffs, buyouts and cutbacks that seem to be a fact of life in the modern American workplace.

What struck me about this article wasn’t the advice it offered, which was pretty straightforward and basic. What got me thinking were some of the statistics listed in the Tribune story, such as “Young workers face the prospect of changing jobs nearly nine times before they reach age 32, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, ” and that in March, “the average length of unemployment for all ages was nearly 17 weeks, [and] workers over 50 face longer job searches.”

I’ve written here before about how stressed out workers are and the very different and modern approach some are taking as they cope with layoffs. Fact is, for all the talk about a “talent shortage” or a “war for talent,” it still is very much a buyer’s market when it comes to getting and keeping a job—especially now as we head into a recession.

The Tribune story makes the point that today’s workers always need to be preparing for the worst and that “there’s little excuse these days for not being ready to kick a job search into high gear at a moment’s notice.” That’s great advice to keep in mind, because no matter whether it is called a layoff, buyout, cutback or “Productivity Transformation Program,” the stability of the job you’re in today is a tenuous illusion at best.

I’ve learned this the hard way, as I’m sure many of you have too. It’s always great to hope for the best, but you’ll be better off and sleep better at night if you also make sure to prepare for the worst, because it generally happens when you least expect it.

Leave it to The New York Times to come up with a silly new workforce trend that sounds environmentally friendly but is really just marketing gibberish for politicians and overpaid consultants to tout: green-collar jobs.

And just what is a green-collar job, you rightly ask? “A green-collar job is in essence a blue-collar job that has been upgraded to address the environmental challenges of our country,” according to Lucy Blake, chief executive of the Apollo Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups, labor unions and politicians, who talked to the Times. Her coalition is “seeking to transform the [U.S.] economy into one based on renewable energy.”

Blake and other advocates of green-collar jobs see “an economy with millions of workers installing solar panels, weatherizing homes, brewing biofuels, building hybrid cars and erecting giant wind turbines. Labor unions view these new jobs as replacements for positions lost to overseas manufacturing and outsourcing. Urban groups view training in green jobs as a route out of poverty. And environmentalists say they are crucial to combating climate change.”

Don’t get me wrong—I have nothing against new jobs of any sort, especially ones that help us break free of our dependence on foreign oil. But I wonder: Why do we need to apply some new, politically loaded term to these positions? Is it because some view the use of the term “blue collar” as a pejorative?

“Some skeptics argue that the phrase ‘green jobs’ is little more than a trendy term for politicians and others to bandy about,” the Times story says.  “Some say they are not sure that these jobs will have the staying power to help solve the problems of the nation’s job market, and others note that green jobs often pay less than the old manufacturing jobs they are replacing. Indeed, such is the novelty of the green-job concept that no one is certain how many such jobs there are, and even advocates don’t always agree on what makes a job green.”

The reason politicians are getting caught up in the green-collar job frenzy is simple: Not only does it sound good to be “for” green-collar jobs, but green jobs “cannot be easily outsourced, say, to Asia,” according to Van Jones, president of Green for All, an organization based in Oakland, California, whose goal is promoting renewable energy and lifting workers out of poverty. As he told the Times, “If we are going to weatherize buildings, they have to be weatherized here. If you put up solar panels, you can’t ship a building to Asia and have them put the solar panels on and ship it back. These jobs have to be done in the United States.”

I like the idea of green-collar jobs, but I am leery of the hype and political baggage that seems to permeate The New York Times story.  This may be a great new workforce trend, but I am not convinced. Green-collar jobs sound like something from a Dr. Seuss story.

And besides, my skeptical/cynical nature tells me that something is amiss when a solid-but-boring old term like blue collar gets pushed aside by politicians, activists and consultants for something that sounds cool, hip and friendly (and maybe even recyclable). Blue-collar jobs have stood the test of time. Green-collar jobs? Well, let’s wait and see.